Page 6

Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems - 35 Years of Serious Commotion Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems 2010 ^ Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems http //cmpbs org 8604 Farm to Morket 969 Austin, TX 78724 ISBN 10. 0-61- 539819-7 ISBN 13: 978-0-61539-819-8 Unless otherwise noted, all artwork, photographs, and text © Center lor Maximum Potential Building Systems. Used by permission. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or means electronic or mechanical including photocopy, recording, or any other information storage and retrieval system, without the writien permission from the publisher and the artists. Written and edited by Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori. Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems Book design by Bess Hester and Nick Hester, Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems Printed by American Printing & Mailing, Austin, Texas. This book was printed using soy based inks on FSC and Green Seal certified process chlorine free paper containing 100% post consumer waste, and manufactured using 100% wind power Cert no SCS<DC40W7 FSC Recyded

Page 7

Maximum Potential — a state that is never quite attainable — the Center strives to potentialize life support systems. Building — first, as a noun, so it becomes solid and tangible as in buildings; then, as a verb, so it becomes action as in building community. Systems — everything is a system; if not, there would be no feedback, no evolution, no life. Living systems — biotic and abiotic — maximize potential futures; If not, there would be no change. Potential Systems become life at the next step.

Page 8

INTRODUCTION FOREWORD 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 9 RECOGNITION 10 CMPBS PEOPLE & ASSOCIATES 12 PROTOCOLS AREA POINT NETWORK 22 LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK 32 BASELINEGREEN - GREENBALANCE 38 ECOBALANCE 44 VISIBLEGREEN 56 PROTOSCOPE 60 POLICY, RESEARCH, & EDUCATION THE WORKING ATLAS 68 THE CALICHE REPORT 32 NICARAGUA’S MISKITO INDIANS 92 AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER PROGRAM. 102 AIA’S ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE GUIDE 116 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY EPICENTER: THE EIGHT PRINCIPLES 124 TEXAS GUIDE TO RAINWATER HARVESTING 130 GREENING THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR 134 GREEN URBANISM AT MUELLER 142 VERANO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 148 PROTOTYPES CRYSTAL CITY 160 HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH 168 CARRIZO SPRINGS 174 LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM 180 ADVANCED GREEN BUILDER DEMONSTRATION HOME 190 BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES 206 UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON SCHOOL OF NURSING 212 EAST TEXAS PROJECT 218 GREENFORMS 226 LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE 232 UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOLAR DECATHLON 238 ESCARPMENT VILLAGE & BLOCK 21 246 TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE 252 COMMUNITY SUPPORTED ARCHITECTURE 260 TEXAS A&M SOLAR DECATHLON 268 GALVESTON REDEVELOPMENT 282 ECOSPORTS COMPLEX 298 ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE: HAITI 306 APPENDIX TERMINOLOGY 324 CREDITS . 326 BIBLIOGRAPHY 328

Page 9

MOROCCO ECO CITY ECOSPORTS COMPLEX 3LOCK 71 GALVESTON RFDEV PROTO SCOPE FI PASO GREEN CITY LEED’” RESIDENTIAI NEW DEV COMM. MISSISSIPPI GROHOME VERANO SUSTAINABLE DEV COMMUNITY SUPPORTED ARCH GREEN GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE GRFFNFORMS TEXAS A&M SOLAR DECATHLON EAST lEXAS PROJECT BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES AIA’S ENV. RESOURCE GUIDE AREA POINT fyNETWORK LAREDO DEMO FARM AUSIIN GREEN BUILDER PROGRAM o^ CRYSTAL CITY / PLANNING °< FOR MISKITO NDIAN.S PUERIO CABEZAS IHE WORKING ATLAS HILL COUNTRY YOUIH RANCH THE CALICHE REPORT HOUSING FOR SIOUX NAIION CARRIZO SPRINGS — — PROTOCOLS POLICY, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATION 0 1

• PROTOTYPES GREENING THE PENTAGON GREEN URBANISM AT MUELLER DELL CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS SEATTLE JUSTICE CENTER MSU EPICENTER: EIGHT PRINCIPLES SEATTLE SALMON FRIENDLY BUILDING / VISIBLE GREEN ISLAND NATIONS NITIATIVE d / BASELINE < GREEN U GREEN ^BALANCE& ECOBALANCE. GAMEJ QR CODE I 1 UT HEALIH SCIENCE CENTER o’TEXAS =GUIDE TO RAINWATER .; ^HARVESTING/ | ECOBALANCE I LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK UT SOLAR DECATHLON LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER DEMO. HOME TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE HOUSING FOR NAVAJO NATION

Page 11

For 35 years the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems has brought people together in an environment of inquiry, discovery, and inspiration — a place to collaborate on developing tools, principles, prototypes and policies to help shape a sustainable world. Interns describe it as a place where they are asked to think. Fundamentally integrative and interdisciplinary, we view each project as an opportunity to expand a knowledge base, derived from the past and present and informed by anticipating a greener though uncertain future. Life cycle thinking underpins our projects at every scale, and provides a cohesive thread from small-scale owner-builder residences where we view life cycle as life support events, to large-scale mixed-use buildings and master planned communities where life cycles are enhanced by eco-industrial processes. Projects are often messy and with elastic timelines — often without a client in the conventional sense but instead driven by an itching desire to test out an idea or hypothesis. Our belief that by doing and demonstrating comes deep knowledge permeates the spirit of the Center. Prototypes are the heart of open learning, of transparent sharing of what works and what doesn’t, and of advancing the collective wisdom in our small way so that others can further advance. From prototypes evolve protocols, policies and opportunities to influence at a larger scale. Collaborations with national demonstration projects like the Greening of the White House, Greening of the Grand Canyon, and Greening of the Pentagon provided a big stage in the 1990s to showcase a fundamental reset of how to consider the built environment as intrinsic to a regional life cycle metabolism, intertwined with the fate of the natural environment and the public health. A seemingly modest idea to expand Austin’s energy conservation program into a multiple flow, life cycle based program turned out to be a game changing big idea, fundamentally shaping what became Austin’s Green Builder Program — to our knowledge, the first green building program in the world in 1990, just 20 years ago, and a key influencer of the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED”. An engagement with the AlA’s Environmental Resource Guide further expanded possibilities that evolved into the first national input-out geographic information systems model tracking the environmental and economic impacts of building materials decisions nationwide. And, an invitation to author a paper on green and healthy buildings for the healthcare sector ten years ago revealed a stunning disconnect between green building and healthcare facilities. The paper was a catalyst to convene the Green Guide for Health Care, establishing an explicit connection between human health and the built environment, today with more than 33,000 registrants, 25 percent from outside the U.S.. Our commitment to shape our place — Austin, Texas — continues. We have learned from remarkable collaborations and partnerships with developers, planners, designers, contractors, elected officials, public policymakers, educators, students, and our neighbors, creating a portfolio of projects that represent a readiness to take one more step ahead; not to comply but to revel in shaping a future that requires new knowledge, new partnerships and new solutions. This work is never singular — it relies on the wisdom and labor of the many. We are fortunate to have had supportive boards, spirited clients, and a gifted, agile, multi-talented staff and interns to join with us over these years. We are enriched by our colleagues who have been ready to collaborate when we’ve posed questions like “how can we make a 100% by-product based concrete mix” and then see it happen, and who have provided extraordinary opportunities for us to collaborate with them on extraordinary projects. We are enabled by our generous funders who, beginning with the first three-year commitment from The Menil Foundation in 1975, give us the confidence to pursue this path deemed worthy of their support. We are honored and humbled to have been part of serious commotion over 35 years — and we are hopeful that this commotion will continue to have a role in shaping a green future for all.

Page 13

When we first conceived of this book there was no way for us to foresee what it would become. By some counts, 35 years is more than a generation—indeed, it is more years than the age of most people who work here. It is also a reminder of the remarkable output that can come from a small group of inspired and inspiring people, to acknowledge Margaret Mead’s prescient words. CMPBS modest size and budget has, for more than three decades, instilled a necessity to stretch opportunities, to do more than what seems possible or practical, and, sometimes, to pursue an idea because it’s the right thing to do and no one else is doing it. This book is filled with examples of our desire to know vs. wonder, do rather than just think and to maximize the potential of what might be possible. To capture the stories that underlie the images, and to reveal a narrative that is grounded on very basic concepts— to understand in todays complex world where something actually comes from and where something actually goes. People create the opportunities and the results. Daria Bolton Fisk was a conceiver and co-founder of this bold, ambitious idea at its inception—we thank you. We have been honored to have had boards of directors who, from the first Board in 1975, understood that the answers to what we were doing weren t always known—that CMPBS was discovering answers, some of which could never have been anticipated. Their support and confidence has been unwavering. Our current Board Officers Cynthia Leigh, President, Bob Anderson, Treasurer; Members David Armistead, Daniel Komer, Alberto Luera, Dee Simpson; Emeritii Jim Nations and Ray Reece and Board Advisor Wendy Vittori are immeasurably appreciated. Our funders, beginning with the initial three-year grant in 1975 from Dominique de Menil of The Menil Foundation, have consistently believed in what we do and provided essential latitude to test the boundaries of what is possible. Thank you to The Ann R. Roberts Fund, Earthshare of Texas, The Educational Foundation of America, The James R. Dougherty Foundation, The Jenifer Altman Fund, The Kendeda Fund, The Meadows Foundation, The Merck Family Fund, The Mitchell Kapor Foundation, The Rachael & Ben Vaughan Foundation, The Rubin Foundation, The Stern Fund, The Vervane Foundation, The Warren Skaaren Foundation and all the individual contributors and donors who have made our work possible since 1975. Our clients and collaborators, too numerous to identify individually, are reflected in the pages that follow-we are grateful for all the ways you have enriched us and provided opportunities to advance our protocols, policies and prototypes. Notably, Texas A&M University’s College of Architecture and Dean Jorge Vanegas has generously supported fruitful collaborations with the Center since Pliny joined their faculty in 2005. Our staff and interns have contributed, inspired and challenged us from the micro to the macro scales. To ingrain a sense of comfort in the process of discovering to know is not always easy as it counters so much of what learning and education offers today. In our minds, the results are powerful, and help to shape a way of thinking to be carried on by the next generation. As we finalize this book, Evan Brooks, Margaret Chandler, Aaron Cloninger, Cassidy Ellis, Alice Embree, Lovleen Gill-Aulakh, Bess Hester, Nick Hester, Lauren Jones, Eli Martin, Janet Maykus, Randall Notgrass, Johnathan Perisho, Mary Petrovich, Melissa Pineda. Dylan Siegler, Sam Vondereau, are the staff and interns who work with us everyday, along with Melanie Schopper who brings us together every Friday for a memorable and hearty lunch. They are always ready to roll up their sleeves, to ask questions and to make invaluable contributions to this journey. There are stories to tell about each one of these amazing people and their predecessors; we will close with one. Bess and Nick Hester met Pliny at a talk at Mississippi State University in 2009 Graduates of MSU’s School of Architecture, they were intrigued by what they heard and visited the Center. A few months later, they joined us, in March 2010, with an idea to compile papers and projects chronicling the Center’s 35-year history. What was a modest idea evolved over a scant six months into a herculean effort to locate, catalog, interpret and organize 35 years of work, we are sure surpassing what they ever imagined they would be doing or the magnitude of the result. Their inspired efforts are now manifest in this book—our 35 years of serious commotion. We thank them along with everyone else, their families and ours, who have made all this possible.

Page 14

“I have gone over your various research and development projects and find them lucid, intelligent, economic, and in 1971 every way gratifying’.’ - R. Buckminster Fuller, letter to Max’s Pot, 1971 Energy Primer identifies the Laboratory for Maximum Potential Building Systems at the UT School of Architecture as 1972 one of the best — if not the best — university program on integrated building systems in the US. Three year grant received from The Menil Foundation. 1975 The UN Habitat invites Max’s Pot to exhibit at the UN conference on Human Settlements in Vancouver, Canada. 1976 CMPBS’ work in Crystal City, Texas featured in the Christian Science Monitor, PBS national television and in 1979 The Sun Betrayed: A Report on the Corporate Seizure of U.S. Solar Energy Development Pliny Fisk III featured in The New York Times “Alternative Energy Conference Told of Windmills and Ice Cubes.” 1980 CMPBS recognized by the National Center for Appropriate Technology as having developed one of 31 exemplary 1981 community energy projects in the United States. CMPBS selected by the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development as one of ten outstanding community- based renewable energy efforts in the US, from 600 surveyed. Pliny Fisk III collaborates on Save The Children American Indian Nation’s Housing Program. 1985 Pliny Fisk III awarded Honorable Mention for Affordable Housing Design by the City of Austin. 1986 1st Place in the National Endowment for the Arts, Designing for Area Resource Efficiency Competition. CMPBS commissioned to design a community center prototype for the Travis County Housing Authority. CMPBS featured in Austin American Statesman article “Couple uses materials from area to build home.” 1987 Gail Vittori co-founds Citizens for Responsible Waste Management. Gail Vittori appointed Founding Chair of the City of Austins Solid Waste Advisory Commission. 1988 CMPBS founding member of EarthShare of Texas. CMPBS introduced original framework tor first green building program to City of Austin. 1989 Pliny Fisk III chosen as one of six members for a U.S. Delegation to the Soviet Union representing Sustainable Development and Renewable Energy. Pliny Fisk III receives Distinguished Appropriate Technology Award, National Center for Appropriate Technology. ’ 1991 Pliny Fisk III receives the Maharishi Award from the Ministry of Environment and Education, Austin. Laredo Demonstration Farm featured in Architecture’s first green issue. City of Austin Green Building Program recognized for Local Environmental Initiatives at U.N. Earth Summit as one of 1992 twelve projects worldwide and the only United States project. Pliny Fisk III co-chairs the AIA Committee on the Environment’s Environmental Resource Guide. Pliny Fisk 111 appointed to Environmental Building News’ founding advisory board. Pliny Fisk III participates in “Greening of the White House” and “Greening of the Grand Canyon” charrettes. 1993 Pliny Fisk III joins team for Sustainable Relocation of the Mississippi Flood. 4th place in Environmental & Affordable Housing Competition, Secretario de Desarrollo Social (Mexico) 1994 Laredo Demonstration Farm featured in Architecture in North America: since 1960. 1995 RECOGNITION R. Buckminster Fuller Energy Primer Menil grant UN Habitat Christian Science Monitor PBS The Sun Betrayed The New York Times NCAT Recognition HUD Recognition Save The Children Affordable Housing Design NEA Competition Community Center Prototype Austin American Statesman CRWM Solid Waste Commission Earthshare Texas Austin Green Building U.S. Delegation NCAT Award Maharishi Award Architecture U.N. Earth Summit AIA ERG Committee EBN Advisoary Board “Greening of” charrettes MS Flood team SEDESOL Competition Architecture in North America

Page 15

Presidential Team Award The New York Times 1996 Pliny Fisk III member of team which received Presidential Team Award for Mississippi Flood Relocation. CMPBS featured in The New York Times article “Mr. Fisk Builds His Dream House.” PBS 1997 CMPBS featured on PBS’ Planet Neighborhood. UT Advanced Design Studio Harvard GSD Loeb Fellos Cent. American Architects 1998 Gail Vittori teaches Advanced Design Studio at University of Texas School of Architecture. Gail Vittori selected as a Loeb Fellow at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design. The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home featured in Contemporary American Architects. Austin Heroes 1999 Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori recognized as Austin Heroes in the category of Sustainability. Healthy Building Network ASES Pioneer 2000 Gail Vittori invited to participate in the Healthy Building Network’s founding meeting. Pliny Fisk III named Passive Solar Pioneer by the American Solar Energy Society. USGBC Board of Directors 2001 Gail Vittori elected to U.S. Green Building Council Board of Directors. Green Guide for Health Care USGBC Sacred Tree Award FEMA Leadership Award 2002 CMPBS convenes the Green Guide for Health Care, with initial funding provided by The Merck Family Fund. Pliny Fisk III receives the U.S. Green Building Council’s First Sacred Tree Award for Non-Profit Organizations. Gail Vittori receives Award for Leadership in Federal Energy Management, recognizing participation in the Pentagon Renovation Program. Green Communities Initiative USBGC LEED for Health Care Honorary State Chairman 2004 Gail Vittori selected to develop initial framework for the Enterprise Foundation’s Green Communities Initiative. Gail Vittori appointed as Founding Chair of U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED for Healthcare Committee. Pliny Fisk III appointed as Honorary State Chairman of the First Texas Clean Energy Congress. Mayor Award Texas A&M Faculty 2005 Pliny Fisk III receives Mayoral Award from the City of Austin. Pliny Fisk III joins Texas A&M Faculty as Signature Professor and Fellow in Sustainable Urbanism, Fellow in Health System Design, and Center for Housing and Urban Development. Dwell Metropolis 2006 CMPBS featured in Dwell magazine article “Eco-noclast.” Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori featured as Visionaries in Metropolis. Austin Monthly TIME Magazine 2007 Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori featured as Green Giants in Austin Monthly. Gail Vittori featured as an Innovator for Building a Greener World in TIME Magazine. Gail Vittori selected as one of “Twenty Who Are Making A Difference in Healthcare” in Healthcare Design. Healthcare Architecture Texas Monthly Citizen Architect Summit on Public Housing 2008 Gail Vittori co-authors Sustainable Healthcare Architecture with Robin Guenther, published by Wiley. Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori featured in Texas Monthly as one of 35 Texas Visionaries. CMPBS becomes fiscal sponsor of Citizen Architect, a film about Samuel Mockbee and the Rural Studio. Gail Vittori participates in the national Summit on the Future of Public Housing. USDHS Sustainability Force Chair, USBGC BoD CNN Eco-Pioneers Green Roof Advisory 2009 Gail Vittori appointed to U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Sustainability and Efficiency Task Force. Gail Vittori serves as Chair of the U.S. Green Building Council Board of Directors. Pliny Fisk III featured as one of four worldwide CNN International’s Going Green: Eco-Pioneers. Dylan Siegler appointed to the City of Austin’s Green Roof Advisory Group. Top Green Building 2010 Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home, designed by Pliny Fisk, ranked in top ten green buildings since 1980 in Architect magazine.

Page 16

Who! has CMPBS meant for me? Just do it. Dorit wait for permission or assurance, or just the right time or place. But do honor and try to discern what time, place, people and circumstances you’re in. Work to demonstrate what’s possible and what designing and building in response to local climate, material base, knowledge and skill base could mean. Offer a glimpse of a new/old way. Buildings that heat and cool themselves all by themselves. No fossil fuel use, no outside energy input. Digging into the earth, using that earth, discovering and rediscovering our rich potential in earth, wind, sun, in natural processes. Exploring traditional ways, be they earth structures and cooling wind tower of Iran or earth bricks and building methods of Egypt, or local Texos farmers and builders knowing just how local grasses can stabilize the earth under their own feet. That’s what the Center meant for me, for us. Sharing and networking with others, as much for knowledge as moral support and the energy and hutzpah to forge ahead creating our own examples. I think of Geoff Stanford, Howard Scoggins, Steve Baer, learning by doing and not afraid to fail. Of Jeff Lanza, as tall and steady a doer as well ever know: of Ray Reece and Harley Clark, tooting our horns for us, helping us sort things out behind the scenes. From alternative building and growing methods to hand-operated, high-output earth brick machines, what we all called “appropriate technology.” Small scale, low cost, direct, readily understandable, doable, and easily replicable, local based on renewable resources and aimed at local self-reliance. Embracing ingenuity, decentralized, and ultimately working toward participatory democracy.- both independence and inter-dependence. I think of Crystal City and helping to launch a city-wide mesquite collection program used with 1,000 wood stoves left over from the Korean Wor, a move to counter the natural gas shut-off to the entire city. And then, “la bomba,” a wonderfully simple, low-cost solar collector, built with cast-off gas hot water heaters, burnt-out fluorescent light tubes, old election signs and used newspaper printing plates for reflectors. For me, the link to participatory design and building was obvious… one more piece in the true democracy puzzle. So came interactive design and planning tools, from overlapping maps to 3D models, to interactive games. Now, these 1975 decades later, that work seems both idealistic, visionary, and naive about how change could happen, somehow trusting that demonstration alone would make a big difference. Yet how playful, refreshing, brave even. 1 salute 1977 that spirit and impulse in us all and in the Center over all these years. From Austin Urban Alternatives to the Texas Appropriate Technology Network to the Texas Solar Action Coalition, may one thing continue to lead to another and may we remember to tread lightly, but boldly as we, in Paulo Freire’s and Miles Horton’s words, “make this road “78 by walking.” Daria Bolton Fisk 1979 Go-Founder. Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems I remember cleorly the day I met Pliny in Crystal City back in 75, right after we had lost the case with the natural “8° gas provider, Lo Vaca Gathering Company. Pliny was there to help ameliorate this disaster. The problem of heating the water in homes of the mostly needy citizens was solved by Pliny’s design of the first Crystal City Solar Hot 1981 Water Heater, or the “rockets to the moon” as they baptized them by the local citizenry. Pliny’s design introduced 1982 all recycled materials He used old discarded water heaters, mounted on recycled pallets covered with recycled 1984 printing sheets and placed on an angle to redirect the sun rays towards the recycled water heater painted in flat “85 black paint. They did look like rockets! The water was thus warmed to a paltry 75-80 degrees Fahrenheit. This invention plus the set up of the mesquite burning pot belly stoves, helped tremendously in surviving the first winter in 1986 Crystal City without gas for cooking and heating thanks to Pliny and his Max’s Pot enterprise. Whenever we traveled out of the country, people knew we were from Crystal City because they could smell us at a distance. The smell of 1987 mesquite was unmistakable. We will be forever in debt in our hearts for the indefatigable, unselfish and committed “88 help of you all during those troubled times, Alejandro Neiri 1990 1991 CMPBS PEOPLE & ASSOCIATES BOARD OF DIRECTORS • Founding Boord Members Bob Anderson Lyova Anderson* Stephen P. Anderson* Gary Ashford Lucia Athens David Armistead Pamela Mayo Clark Harley Clark Juan Cotera Gloria DeLeon Susan DeMarco Mary Emeny Daria Fisk* Pliny Fisk III* Carlos Guerra Guy Herman Dan Komer David Lake Karen Langley Cynthia Leigh Alberto Luera James Nations Michael Osborne Ray Reece Philip Russell Howard Scoggins Dee Simpson Emily Vargas Gail Vittori Gail Watkins Pliny Fisk III Daria Bolton Fisk Beth Caldwell Lansing Pugh Elizabeth Richards Barbara Hofrenning Hernando Merino John Motloch John Hand Gail Vittori Ray Wilson Richard Johns Paolo Minissi Michele Seghers Eri Weinstein Scott Campbell John Hart Stephen Gerdes David Madden Richard Pruiksma Josef Farbiarz Ray Zamora Art Myer W. Laurence Doxsey Tom Glassford Tom Miller Howard Reichmuth Milosav Cekic Michael Gimbrere Richard MacMath Randall Notgrass Jim Walker Michael Gatto Chris Perry Jim Robertson 1992 1993

Page 17

1 first met Pliny in the early 1970s at the School of Architecture 26th Street Annex at the University of Texas at Austin. I was a graduate student and he was a young mad scientist professor working on developing new building materials and alternative construction methods. At the same time, I also met Wolf Hilbertz, a German who was working with electrolytic seawater accretion processes. For someone educated in the beaux-arts tradition and working on his theoretical thesis like myself, what Pliny and Wolf were doing was interesting but, in my mind, did not have much to do with the essence of architecture. Then, in 1975, Pliny and Wolf put together one of the best conferences in the history of UT School of Architecture that brought in some of the then most provoking thinkers about the built environments, from Paolo Soleri to Friedrich St. Florian to systems’ theory’s West Churchman, Jeffrey Cook, Amory Lovins, and many others of whom I d never heard before. Over the next two to three days, my whole world of concepts and ideas about architecture was destroyed and I began to see the inherent limits in the excruciatingly narrow scope of concerns we architects impose on ourselves. 1975 was a part of the post-modern era and the built environment field was open to a variety of concepts. Two particular ideas from this conference stuck and stayed with me throughout my professional work. One is the fundamental need of architecture to be imbedded in good urbanism of a place and for architectural objects to serve something greater than themselves. The other was that whatever we do as humans is a burden on the natural environment and that we need to find a way to minimize and eventually eliminate that burden. Other ideas, such as Soleri’s miniaturization and St. Florian’s “imaginary architecture,” were also very exciting and promising. A few years ago, as Pliny and I worked together on the best sustainable practices on a Son Antonio project, we were finally able, after all these years, to convert some of the original, long-term, large-scale ideas into workable design tools. Facilitating acceptance of the new paradigm is a long and unpredictable process. Over the years, the work of CAAPBS, both theoretical and practical, has significantly contributed to the more broadening of our operating framework and to generating design tools to help shape a healthier and more beautiful civilization and in an increasing harmony with the natural world. But we still have a long way to go. Milosciv Cekic Principal, MC/A Architects; Austin, Texas The kind of knowledge that CMPBS produces is hardly grasped through readers, books, and formal coded information. What is really their “tour de force” is the learning environment one can only experience in those highly concentrated, intense, intellectually-charged, and physically demanding Center events. The charrettes, reunions, meetings, and project report deadlines, when the CMPBS team (literally everyone around) demonstrates why they are unique, and how the “serious commotion” happens. During those hectic days (and sometimes weeks), one never knows where his work is going to fit; if it will require your analytical brains, your artistic vision, your political point of view or if you are going to help in the kitchen. But it really doesn’t matter, since everything flows in the same direction, however hard to distinguish, up to the last minute. I’ve been participating in many of those happenings for the last seventeen years and am still amazed at how they can put together such a diverse and highly motivated group of people and get quality work done. 1 guess the secret is how they manage to align people’s dreams, experiences, talents, and hearts together. Rodolpho Romina Director, U&A Engenharia e Planejamento; Curitiba, Brazil Ian McHarg introduced me to Pliny and thereby to ground zero of metabolic and later ecoBalance design. I had just completed the MLA at Penn (1978) and was working on the Pardisan project at WMRT. For family reasons I had to return to Texas. Ian warned me that Texas was not ready for ecological planning and design; but that if I was returning, I should contact Pliny Fisk. I did and my design world exploded! I first worked at CMPBS in 1978 (Ingram School, Crystal City energy retrofit, waste-based solar water heaters); and was hired away by A&M in its ‘before Pliny’ phase (Whodathunk Texas A&M could make that shift?). CMPBS stream-of-consciousness, brainstorming weekends kept me sane at A&M. In 1993, I had a grant researching Mexico’s Solidarity program. But letters including one from the TEC de Monterry President did not gain access to federal officials. I called Pliny because he does globally-significant projects that connect him with national leaders. Pliny called a friend in Mexico City (who was also a friend of the President of Mexico). He invited me to his home. We visited, he made a phone call, we had margaritas and he called me a cab. He told me to check at the hotel desk when I arrived. I did (an hour later) and had three key appointments. The other three were set by breakfast. How’s that for Pliny being connected! My greatest CMPBS memories include working on remarkable projects with dear friends. They include unforgettable weeks (1993) with Pliny simultaneously leading the CMPBS green demonstration office (another team) and our team entry (Fisk, Motloch, and Pacheco) to Mexico’s Affordable-Sustainable Housing Competition. (It is amazing how hot a retrofitted chicken coupe is during Texas summers!) More recent memories include that First and Second Buckminster Fuller rewarding work with Pliny, Gail, and highly-talented CMPBS interns. I consider myself truly fortunate to have known Pliny and Gail all these years, and for periodically working with them and the wonderful CMPBS staff and interns on some of the unbelievable projects through which CMPBS is leading the shift to an ecobalance-designed world. Thank you, Pliny, for being a great teacher, mentor, colleague and friend. It has been great working with you and Gail, and with all the CMPBS staff and interns over the past 35 years! John Motloch Professor of Landscape Architecture, Ball State University; Muncie, Indiana

Page 18

Perhaps not surprisingly, one of my earliest encounters with Pliny Fisk III occurred underground, literally and figuratively. I had driven out to the original headquarters of CMPBS (Max’s Pot) in far west Austin, where I was due to interview Pliny for an article I was writing. He led me down some wooden steps to the interior of the first earth- bermed dwelling I had ever seen. “It’s cool in the summer and warm in the winter,” he explained, grinning his mad inventor’s grin, “without consuming a Btu of fossil fuel. It’s magic.” Then he showed me other magic strewn about the place: a thermosiphon solar collector for heating water; a hand-operated brick-making machine, the material for which was local caliche; and a section of wall that was being assembled from recycled Coke and Pepsi bottles. “Very effective insulation.” said Pliny. I was delighted both by the ingenuity of these projects and by the fact that they were subversive of Big Energy, U.S.A. That made Pliny, in my view, an underground leader of the coming revolution in resource technology and systems design. He was an egalitarian, too, implicitly anti-corporate, whose work was informed as much by his devotion to community-building as by his passion for appropriate technology in defense of planet Earth. Indeed, it was at about this time, in 197Z that Max’s Pot embarked on a bold and innovative struggle to bring energy self-reliance to the people of Crystal City, Texas, whose supply of natural gas had been terminated by a pipeline monopoly. The attempt fell short, owing to a federal energy bureaucracy controlled by Big Corporate, but the effort was so stellar I made it the centerpiece of the opening chapter of The Sun Betrayed, a book that grew out of the article I was writing when Pliny took me underground. Ray Reece Emeritus Board Member; Cagli, Italy Serious Commotion says it all. Reflecting on what Max’s Pot has been doing the last 35 years it seems this really is the essence and genius of the Center - keeping us a bit off-balance and destabilized so that we are compelled to think about new and necessary ways of viewing the world and our role in it. In the 1980’s I heard of this group in Texas who were up to strange and thoughtful things. Delightfully, our paths crossed and the varieties of projects or conferences around which we’ve interacted always give me hope because of the grounded nature of their practice and, at the same time, frequently cause me some frustration due to the need to re-adjust old mental-models. Change is hard. Pliny, Gail, and the Center remind us of the need to keep evolving and it is an honor to be influenced by their work. Bill Reed President, Integrative Design Collaborative; Arlington, Massachusetts When Gail wrote and asked about how Ian McHarg had influenced Pliny and the days before Max’s Pot, I immediately recalled a conversation I had with Ian not so many years before he died. He was writing about students whom he felt had fulfilled his vision of design with nature, one of whom was Pliny. In so many words he said, “Of all my students I think I had the least influence on Pliny, I learned more from him than he did from me. Pliny arrived at Penn fully formed like Venus and left just better informed by the people he met here but still exactly the same. And he is the same today Same mission. Same methods. Better tools.” As someone who has known Pliny since college I can readily agree that he really hasn t changed much. Hes barely matured. Whether we are designing bat towers or discussing the virtues of peroxide, it is always a party. And with Pliny it is also about sustainability and it always has been, long before that was the byword for this effort. Leslie Sauer Founding Partner, Andropogon Associates; Sargeantsville, New Jersey When I first came to Austin in 1980 as a young “know-it-all’ professor at the University of Texas at Austin, Pliny Fisk was described to me as a weird, long haired hippie in flip flops that came once in a while by the Balcones Research Center to take readings from a plastic igloo he had set up in the middle of the fields. While he has managed to remain weird and ahead of all of us wasteful humans, thirty years later the world we live in has become his greatest asset. The success of the Center during the last thirty-five years is simply the result of Pliny and Gail’s understanding of Life on Earth and of their commitment to improving its quality for all that depend on it. CMPBS is not a product, but a way of living and thus, its resilience, endurance, and continued success It is not often that we find people practicing what they preach.. Pliny and Gail do. I still do not understand many of Pliny and Gails initiatives but, through the years. I have learned to respect them and have become blindly convinced that whatever these are, they will improve and secure the standard of living for generations to come. Thanks for allowing me to hang around with you guys for the last thirty years. It has been a most rewarding experience, Ramon Carrasquillo President, Carrasquillo Associates; Austin, Texas 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Adam Fisk Noah Fisk Ben Obregon Casey Rothschild Sally Struble Bill Bavinger Cordula Oel Peter Struble Jesus Bendezu Greg Jackson Brian O’Brien Clarke Snell Wendy Price Todd James Campbell Simon Couchman Helen Mary Daley James Denney Joanna Dewald Tess Floyd Eric Frost Jerry Garcia Ken Haggard Jennifer Howard Tara Keairnes Kristian Kicinski Paul Kouri Jeff Kruse Cheryl Maglosky Anthony McKenzie J.R. Meliker Roy Miles Suzi Mitchell Garrett Mosiman Greg Norris Michael Nyarko Dick Richardson Kevin John Richardson Harrison Saunders Dan Schellenberg Austin Swinney Petrik Watson Lee Barrett Skye Bender-deMoll Nathan Engstrom Dickson Fogelman David Hsu Martha Kennan Peter Lohmann Eric Parks Paul Robbins Melinda Robillard John Russell Michael Sledd-Benoit Kirby Smith Jacques Abelman Eric Anderson Richard Baker Nikolas Bertulis Laura Boutelle Vahid Brignoni Donna Burrow Rachel Carson Bill Cassis Dawn Danby Janel Dobkins Jessica Kleiss Laura Lagrossa

Page 19

In 1984, the partners of Griffin-West Partnership, all born in Princeton, Texas, sought to develop a 265 acre family plot near their birthplace Collin County was developing rapidly and, sadly, Princeton was becoming the refuse receptacle for the county. The stated goal of the partnership was to change the nature of the community from backwater decay to attractive sustainability Gail Thomas, as director of the Dallas Institute of Humanities and Culture and one of the Griffin- West partners, had heard Pliny Fisk give a presentation in Dallas and felt that CMPBS might be compatible with our development philosophy. During the due diligence phase, I learned that Pliny had been a student of Ian McHarg, who had influenced development of The Woodlands. Tracking McHarg, I attended a seminar sponsored by Lady Bird Johnson on use of wild flowers where McHarg was to be the principal speaker. At the lunch break, I asked Dr. McHarg if he knew Pliny Fisk… “Of course!” he replied, “Fisk was one of my brightest students. He designed a plan to clean up the Susquehanna River by diverting it through pools of water hyacinths. Brilliant! And, it would have worked… A brilliant young man.” Griffin-West had found its development architect. The resulting award winning plans for Princeton Parks prepared by CMPBS were revolutionary. Local citizenry were excited to claim a next generation’ development in their midst. Infrastructure was put in place with city council approval, and the development began just as our single banking source failed, bringing the project to a rapid close… But, the plan and philosophical direction it engendered lives on in the minds of the community. Perhaps next year., or next generation. Ike Griffin How many words mean visionary? They all apply to Gail Vittori, Pliny Fisk and the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Pioneers in the sustainability and green movement, they gave me my first exposure, in the 1980s, to their broad integrated thinking about the interconnectedness of the built and natural environment. Learning from and working with Gail and Pliny was exciting and fun because they operated on two basic principles — cause a commotion and anything is possible. From this incubator, we hatched a plan. At the time, I was working at the Travis County Housing Authority. We owned a small public housing development in Travis County that had lots of kids and families and no place to meet, play and connect as a community. By building a community center at the development with straw/clay blocks using resident volunteers we could keep costs low, build a green building, teach new skills and spur community participation for all ages. We secured funding from the Travis County Commission and off we went to the Austin Planning Commission where our exciting plan ran into a brick wall of zoning and building requirements. Gail and Pliny were ahead of their time, as always, but the City of Austin was not yet there. While the center was never built, working with Gail and Pliny had a profound impact on my thinking about sustainability and interconnectedness, particularly in low income communities. More than twenty years later, in 2008, I was honored to ask Gail to participate in a national leaders Summit on the Future of Public Housing, convened by my organization the Council of Large Public Housing Authorities (CLPHA), to address the preservation of this irreplaceable affordable stock and to set goals for greening 1.2 million units over the next ten years. Gail’s leadership and stature ensured that the goals for greening and sustainability were key priorities. In 2009, Congress appropriated $4 billion in stimulus funding for public housing, persuaded that this investment will create sustainable affordable housing and generate jobs. Housing authorities across the country are employing large scale strategies, in partnership with their residents, to green their communities in every conceivable way. The scope of it takes my breath away — just as Gail and Pliny did all those years ago, before they made “sustainability” part of our every day vocabulary. Sunia Zaterman Executive Director, Council of Large Public Housing Authorities; Washington, DC What is the project that has greatest impact on the welfare of the world? I like to answer that, for me, it is the design of a latrine for self-help housing in the hot dry regions of North African. It was based on designs first developed in Zimbabwe that would have a blackened interior and an air vent that provided light and ventilation. At the top of the air vent an insect screen is placed. Flies are attracted to the light and thus fly against the insect screen until they expire, their remains falling to add to the dry compost pit below. It thus provided a chemical free natural insecticide design to reduce disease transmission by flying insects. The community participants in the self-help housing projects chose this scheme over many other investments they could make to improve their housing communities. A close-second of my own favorites is a project that “Three Amigos” undertook in the mid-1980s to improve housing on the White River Reservation of the Apache Nation. In those years, I served as an appropriate technology consultant for Save The Children. The project was to provide designs and technical recommendations for self-help rehabilitation of substandard housing using local materials, climate design, and skills development and job training. Who else to call upon for this assignment than Pliny Fisk, genius in local technologies and the late Jeffrey Cook, then Professor of Architecture at Arizona State and a world citizen committed to architecture appropriate to context and climate. The housing designs that Fisk and Cook developed for this assignment combined adobe for floors and walls, the use of sawdust and rejects and culls from a local lumber yard for walls, and wood stoves fabricated locally from reworked metal containers. The designs were built by unemployed youth. Through these combined means, limited funds were applied to the largest number of households, in some cases for winterization of existing homes and in other cases for new homes. Donald Watson When I think of CMPBS, my most vibrant memories reflect Gail and Pliny’s remarkable ability to balance a non-stop buzz of work and activity with a serene and steady sense of purpose and focus that drives everything they do. I remember visiting the CMPBS business center, filled with thoughtful, talented students engaged in serious work. It had the air of a field research station. Meanwhile, just out back, Pliny and his students scurried like ants on a hill, hard at work making their Solar Decathlon entry come together. Later that same day, I joined Gail at an Austin City Council meeting where she presented a LEED Gold certification to City Hall, and then immediately on to a meeting with major developers for discussions about changing the very fabric of Austin to dark green. All this in a day’s work at CMPBS. Rick Fedrizzi President, CEO and Founding Chair, U.S. Green Building Council

Page 20

1999The “serious commotion” that Pliny, Gail, and the Center have been making for the last thirty-five years has been a source of inspiration for me and anyone interested in creating designs to improve the outcome of the human experiment in the 21st Century. 1 was already familiar with his work when I first met Pliny in New York about twenty years ago when he and I were being interviewed for an article in “Landscape Architecture.” As I recall, I was having so much fun trying to learn how Pliny thought and exploring ideas with him that I think we may have hijacked the interview. We had just launched AlA’s Committee on the Environment and I was on the hunt for the best and the brightest thinkers to help change the practice of architecture; I knew immediately that Pliny would be a key player in that initiative. Soon thereafter, I visited the Center to observe the commotion first hand and to meet Gail. It was clear immediately that Pliny was the fire behind the commotion, but Gail provided the fuel with no, or at best, very limited resources; she was the COO, CFO, and the clan mother. I was captured by the magical, full immersion laboratory they had created for the interns, themselves and visitors like me. Pliny, of course, had more questions, ideas, and energy than his students. And the students were so caught up in Plinys systems thinking and the construction projects, they actually seemed to enjoy the ‘stone soup’ Gail was serving and the sleeping accommodations loots in the chicken house in breath-taking heat and humidity). I slept in their antique folding guest bed, which I named the Venus Flytrap for its tendency to collapse and entomb visitors. But, like the students, I left changed, knowing I would be including them on our teams whenever possible. When I was asked to assemble a national team of experts to create new sustainable strategies for FEMA following the Great Mississippi Flood in 1993, 1 called Pliny. His participation was critical to the success of stories, physical models and tools he created for them. Their experience was a game of creating their new community. It was his perfect blend of entertainment, community building, and education. While the results have been impressive, the truth is we continue working with Pliny and Gail because they produce more commotion (aka, new thinking lubricated with fun) per hour, per pound or per dollar than anyone we have ever worked with. It’s easy to get addicted to them and their work-smart, play-hard ethic. Bob Berkebile Principal , BNIM Architects; Kansas City, Missouri My first introduction to CMPBS was in the winter of 1992 at one of the famous Friday night gatherings. I had stopped over in Austin on my way from Oregon to Florida ond was framing knock-off houses in the northwest hills

• that night I was looking for something a little different. A couple weeks later I was helping repair a straw-bale insulated shed at a shiitake mushroom farm in rural east Texas. When I subsequently moved out to the Center to fully engage I had never delved into the concepts of sustainability much less gotten my hands dirty trying to implement those concepts. Living with the Fisk-Vittori family in the mid-90s introduced me to a risky, broad thinking about connections, gave me nights with big sky stars and winding talks with Randall, reinforced in me the notion that saving the world might take some time and will be rooted in crazy projects dreamed up at places like CMPBS, a notion that is the imperative of our time. That perhaps is one of the greatest values of the Center - dreaming big daily and |ust beyond our current abilities is an increasingly necessary lifestyle. From my time at CMPBS, I’ve found a context for my professional and personal life, and many, many close friendships - and for all that 1 will always happily raise a glass to the Center. Jim Walker Director of Sustainability. University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas In the projects that I have investigated with Gail and Pliny, the process of researching information has been as valuable as the knowledge shared. And, in my case, the projects live on after the Center’s involvement. Gail andI met at plonning meetings for the first Central Texas Green Building Conference in 1995. She later invited me to the Center to meet with her and Pliny to see how a newly licensed architect with an interest in sustainable design might integrate into their projects. 1 first assisted Gail with the groundbreaking professional seminars, funded by the State- Energy Conservation Office, in what I consider to be a precursor of LEED training prior to USGBC certification. Then in 1996,the Texas Water Development Board contracted the Center to produce the state s first comprehensive book about rainwater catchment. I helped to co-author The Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting. The handsome printed book was a friendly primer that included worksheets to calculate water use ond potential collection, and case studies of a variety of systems. Since publication, the State of Texas now exempts catchment equipment from sales tax and allows local governments to exempt systems from ad valorem taxes The book contributes to the advancement of water conservation as an important collaborative effort between individuals, business, and government. Wendy Price Todd Design Advocate, Austin, Texas 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Michelle LaRose Alison McMillin Erie Oden Geoffrey Peek Dirk Raffegerst Karl Schwingel Joachim Serazio Amy Siddon Patricia Tristan Ron Wilcox Bryce Alt Richard Baker Mimi Bardagjy Jeff Hunt Sharon Joyce Brian Luis Fabien Prouvost Rodolpho Romina Janet Seibert Erik Tveite Will Bradshaw Kenneth Davis Chris Driver Aria Finkelstein Carson Fisk-Vittori Michael Kross Amy Marino Ian Pendleton Chris Rowe Pablo Serna Benjamin Spencer Katie Sternberg Paul Waggoner Michael Albanes Lucas Brown Gerardo Carrillos Tara Chesson Amaranta Craig Heidi Dues Jeremy Ellers Nichole Elmer Brian Faitt Frances Hernandez Karia Keeton-Page Spence Kellum Ellen Kolsto Meagan Leleux Kenneth Loshelder Eli Mosley Mary Voorhees Peter Arathoon Monica Brown Amy Holte Carlo Hyman Ingrid Karklins Eric Parks Melanie Schopper Paula Suda Sean Van Delist Wendy Vittori James Wilson Jason Axelrod Elizabeth Baird Charlotte Barrow Steven Bauman Kurt Brethauer John William Byrd

Page 21

I first visited CMPBS during on open house on a chilly Friday in February of 1993, where I met Randall Notgrass and Jim Walker in addition to Pliny and Gail. This was before the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home, before GreenForms, before the Solar D, and before the Factory. But this was not before the Earth Lab, which is where I had the opportunity to go to work optimizing the fly ash cement and concrete formulations for the Demonstration Home. Of course, the Earth Lab was really a converted chicken coop so it blended in quite well with the old farmstead buildings. One overcast and drizzly day, this guy pulls up next to the Earth Lab, hauling an Airstream trailer. Since I was new to the architecture world, I had no idea that this was Steve Bedanes of Jersey Devil fame. Back then, I knew him as just another friend of the Center. Now he’s a role model for community design. In addition to learning that you never know who you’re going to meet at Max’s Pot, Pliny turned me on to many fundamental sustainability concepts that have stuck with me and changed my life forever, including industrial ecology and General Systems Theory. He actually loaned me one of Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s texts for my personal enjoyment. After 6 - 8 months working at Max’s Pot, seeds were planted within me that have been germinating ever since. For some reason, I keep spiraling back to Max’s Pot every few years as if I’m caught in a vortex. Yes, that’s it - I’m in a cosmic vortex. And thanks to Pliny and Gail and all those who’ve made CMPBS over the years, that’s where I’ll stay. Michael Gatto Executive Director, Austin Design and Community Development Center; Austin, Texas Life throws a lot of curves, but every once in a while you’re in the zone and make a connection that’s a game-changer. For me, that connection evolved from a chance meeting with Pliny Fisk III at the ASES Passive Solar Conference in Portland in 1987 As manager of the City of Austin’s Energy Star Program, I had been aware of Pliny’s and Gail Vittori’s Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (colloquially known as Max’s Pot), but it took a trip to Portland to get us in the same room. Pliny and Gail’s work with building systems was (and still is) intriguing and relevant, and when we were looking for grant proposal ideas in 1989,I called the Center. Gail suggested adding an environmental component to the Austin Energy Star program, a new construction program already having some success in drawing mainstream builders to the table to discuss pushing the energy efficiency envelope. The proposal was accepted, and the Center was engaged to flesh out the details. Months later as we developed the program in a comfortable corner of Max’s Pot, the Austin Eco-Home Program became the Austin Green Builder Program, the first program in the country to bring mainstream awareness to the broad environmental and energy impact of buildings. The program was recognized at the first “Earth Summit” in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro and became a launch pad for programs around the world. The elements of green building are not new, nor were they in 1989, but the Austin Green Builder Program and those that followed accelerated what is a phenomenal shift in the building industry. Pliny and Gail were at its roots, and they continue to blossom in their endless passion for sensible shelter. Doug Seiter Branch Chief, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, U.S. Department of Energy; Golden, Colorado Maybe fifteen years ago, Pliny and I found ourselves speaking at the start of a local sustainable community workshop in a well-known Florida city. A break followed our two presentation, at which point, we discovered that the organizers had no agenda for the balance of the day. So, during that quick break, Pliny and I cobbled together workshop activities that, as it turned out, worked quite well. It seemed productive and, just as important, fun was had by all — but no one more than Pliny and I, who, when on stage operate more like a vaudeville team than scholarly presenters. For my next speaking engagement, I brought top hat, tails, and cane. But, without Pliny, my client cried “get the hook.” Michael Kinsley Senior Consultant Built Environment Practice, Rocky Mountain Institute; Snowmass, Colorado An ecology of green building organizations exists in Austin that contributes to the city’s leadership in sustainability. These groups include Austin Energy, the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center, the University of Texas School of Architecture (UTSOA), the UT Center for Sustainable Development, the Central Texas Sustainable Indicators Project, the Charles Moore Foundation, and the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (CMPBS). Like other ecosystems, these entities interact with each other and their Central Texas context. Each also exerts influences beyond Texas. The relationships between the UTSOA and the CMPBS began over 35 years ago when Pliny Fisk moved to Austin in 1972 to join the UTSOA faculty. With several colleagues, he helped establish what has become one of the oldest sustainable design programs in the nation. The influence of Pliny’s mentor, Ian McHarg, is woven into the basic DNA of that program. After Pliny left the UTSOA, the relationships continued. Numerous UTSOA students have worked as interns at the CMPBS. Pliny and Gail Vittori have served as mentors, inspirations, and role models to many of our students. As a visiting professor in 2002, Pliny collaborated with Professor Michael Garrison in UTSOA’s first Solar Decathlon house. Our team received considerable attention from the other thirteen finalist teams because the UTSOA students, under the guidance of Professors Fisk and Garrison, constructed their house as a set of parts (to sit more lightly on the land), rather than the prefabricated approach taken by other university teams. They worked without a crane, which had originally been a National Park Service requirement for decathlon construction on the Mali. The first Solar Decathlon presented an important learning and outreach effort for all participants, especially the students, but also for their faculty advisors. In our case. Garrison, Fisk (and his CMPBS colleagues), and even those of us who watched on the sidelines learned the way teachers often learn from their students. The Solar Decathlon exemplifies how CMPBS teaches, that is, through inspirational ideas and with hands-on leadership. Fritz Steiner Dean, School of Architecture, University of Texas at Austin

Page 22

2004For thirty five years, Pliny Fisk and Gail Vittori have led the way in the development of sustainable building materials and architectural forms that anticipate the future needs and limitations of the Earth. Innovative and ahead of their time, they shared a vision of the future that permeated every part of their lives, giving rise to genius that never stops imagining and creating new solutions. That is the essence of the Center. So, it was with this awareness of CMPBS that I engaged Pliny in an effort to assist with ideas for building in hurricane prone areas. Plinys “catalogue” of virtually every place on the Earth that shares the same geography as Galveston, Texas is, in itself, a masterpiece. I believe that Plinys model for a modular, lightweight but extremely strong, wind-resistant structure, with an almost unlimited number of options for architectural form, will ultimately be considered one of the most viable solutions for building in areas at risk for hurricanes. Sheridan Lorenz The Fisk-Vittori CMPBS is a truly irreplaceable American force of applied eco-enlightenment and civic reform. Hence, during three decades’ national overview as HUD’s urban design administrator, I gained my most valuable of insights via CMPBS. Gail and Pliny join such 20th century urban eco-reform originals as Catherine Bauer Wurster, Louis Mumford, landscape ecologists Ian McHarg (a key Fisk mentor), and Wisconsin’s Philip Lewis, or author Jane Jacobs. For my own work, CMPBS is our urbanized world’s exemplary model for addressing of the paradigm of CS/ LIED (Community Sustainability through Urban Ecological Design) as humanity’s most hopeful trans-disciplinary civic eco-agenda. Today, an ecologically viable future remains in gravest question. ‘Pound-for-pound our most globally effective eco-reformist outfit, CMPBS digs deeply for applied eco-remedial answers. Andrew Euston former H.U.D. Urban Design Administrator, Asheville, North Carolina I met Pliny when I begon work on the AlAs Environmental Resource Guide. I always told him that by the third time I heard or read something from him,I would actually “get” it - and it was always worth the trouble. He was talking systems thinking when others were looking for conventional LCA; his ideas on connecting data from a variety of sources to enable us to see and understand patterns are still fresh. He has always been ahead of the rest of us

• looking at regions and community scales when we were looking at materials and buildings. What has always amazed me about Pliny, Gail and the Maxs Pot group is their ability to combine the most creative way-out thinking with the most down to earth work (literally), as they built structures and machines with materials from their site and found equipment. The results could be a bit scary but were always thought-provoking. Pliny and Gail have been inspirations to me - to think creatively, to stay true to your deep values, to work with people you respect and love, and to have fun while you are doing it. I hope you will continue to surprise us and make us think for another 35 years! Joel Ann Todd Environmental Consultant; Cabin John, Maryland In 2000 after many years of activism in the field of environmental health and justice we were just starting the Healthy Building Network. Our modest goal: to transform the life cycle of building materials to promote best practices in the areas of environmental, health and social equity without - as our friend Gail Vittori taught us to insist - compromising building quality or performance. To help us get started, a friend who had been a community organizer suggested we call someone he knew in Austin who helped stop construction of a giant incinerator in Austin; “a great activist, who knows something about green building. Gail took the cold call, and became our guide and mentor. For the next ten years Gail did as much as any other individual to shape and expand the definition of green building to also be healthy building. She brought CMPBS’s extensive experience in collaborative planning and design process to bear as a co-coordinator of the Green Guide for Health Care, organizing the contributions of a diverse array of activists, architects, engineers, and health care professionals to this innovative new tool. The results have been phenomenal— the first health-based green building guidelines, now downloaded over 25.000 times with over 40 million square feet of registered projects and a strong influence on the market well beyond the health care industry. Gail and Pliny have rightfully earned many accolades and honorifics over the years for their work as green building leaders. But what distinguishes them for us is their roots as activists. It’s funny how informed an off the cuff remark can be. As our old friend said to us a decade ago: these folks are great activists who do indeed know a little something about green building. Bill Walsh, Founder and Executive Director, Healthy Building Network; Marlboro, Vermont and Tom Lent, Policy Director. Healthy Building Network; Berkeley, California 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Jeff Chapman Ariel Fisk-Vittori Andy Karvonen Michael Mallow Tim McGee Dan Overbey Hollie Scott Peter Stair Jesse Turek Aide Uzgiris Jason Avent Michael Camacho David Dewane Rachel Dewane Aaron Gilliam Scott Johnson Andy Karvonen Lula Marcondes Mary Petrovich Ben Phillips Sarah Talkington John Algood Andrew Blaisdell Andy Mattern Dylan Siegler Amanda Thompson Aaron Cloninger Brian Crawford Alice Embree Lovleen Gill-Aulakh Adele Houghton Mimi Kwan Laura Mast Aspen Price Justin Short Blake Smith Rachel Stone Ashley Blackmon Jakob Bueche Cassidy Ellis Janis Fowler Nick Hentschel Sarah Hill Jesse Miller Brooke Morton Jody Naderi-Rosenblatt Amy Rivera Svea Tulberg Brady Zaitoon Sam Brunswick Charlie Candler Youngjae Chung Sebastijan Jemec Lauren Jones Aaron Smith Patrick Bresnan Evan Brooks Margaret Chandler Bess Hester Nick Hester Eli Martin Melissa Pineda Johnathon Perisho Adam Pyrek Armando Salinas Marshall Swearingen Sam Vonderau We regret our inadvertent omission of any of the hard- worhng people from this list, for whom we hold deep respect, appreciation and thanks.

Page 23

The partnership Cate^us established with the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems has surpassed all expectations. From day one, Gail has been instrumental in achieving our goal to lay a sustainable foundation for the entire Mueller development. Her passion and knowledge helped us establish a comprehensive native plantings policy and led Mueller to become the first community in Austin to use the purple reclaimed water pipes for landscaping. Her intensity and expertise guided commercial builders and home builders through the rigorous and nationally recognized green building standards of Austin Energy. Her focus and experience helped nearly every commercial building at Mueller earn a silver, gold or even platinum level rating in the USBGC LEED program. And, through these efforts along with Gail’s tremendous insight, Mueller became the first community in Texas and the largest community in the country to date to earn LEED Neighborhood Development certification. Gail was making the case for sustainable design and infrastructure long before any standards were set in place. We’ve been blessed to have a pioneer in the green building movement located in Austin to work on a development from scratch where sustainability was identified by the community as one of six principle goals. Mueller has been Gails sandbox in her own backyard, and with her passion and prowess, she has created imaginative and beautiful things in it. Greg Weaver President, Catellus Development Group; Austin, Texas The Center is hard to define, which is part of its charm. One never knows just what to expect when one visits, except that it will be a fun and inspiring experience. Will you be put to work helping to build a new green prototype building, be asked to present your latest great idea on edible landscapes, offer input on-a grant application to help rebuild Haiti, or offered a longneck and a volleyball? Pliny and Gail are those special sorts of people that make magic happen all around them. Not only do they set an example for how we can offer our best gifts to the world to make it a better place, they offer a place for others to do their best work, birth their best thinking, or imagine that the impossible is possible. I don’t have one best memory or story about the Center, I have an encyclopedia full. There are not too many places where you can offer up any possibly crazy idea, and no one laughs… a place where people actually listen, and consider that you might just be on to something, no matter who you are, or where you came from. I think of the Center as a shining beacon of hope in a world that has gotten a bit lost along the way, and forgotten, perhaps, that magic can still happen. If the magic results in preserving this beautiful planet we live on, preserving our quality of life, and Keeping Austin Weird, so much the better. Lucia Athens Chief Sustainability Officer, City of Austin, Texas Can Houston become Responsible? This question first posed by Pliny and Gail was troubling to the three of us from the moment it came from their lips. It would not be the only troubling question we would have to face. We were creating a unique process called the “building systems assessment.” The time was 1998. We had the notion that this assessment would review the universe of green building tactics, products, styles and customer needs, and rank them based on their sustainable attributes using full cost accounting methodologies. We needed to do this because we were trying to build the first holistic integrated designed carbon neutral building in the world. One that was based on the principles of sustainability as defined by the Natural Step, The University of Texas School of Nursing and Community Center. We sought out CMPBS as participants in the Building Systems Assessment process because we needed their brain power and their Texas experience to offset the heavy out of state representation on the team. We had experts in architecture, construction, day lighting, economics, energy and energy conservation, estimating, green development, interior concepts, landscaping, lighting, living machines, materials, mechanical systems, solar photovoltaics, security, and information technology as well as U.T. System representatives, vendors; and representatives from the School of Nursing. Pliny, Gail and CMPBS staff excelled in this environment and through their patient and reasoned teaching provided a new frame of reference for many of the team members. In the end, the building was an AIA COTE Top Ten in America, and LEED Gold building. Notably the work CMPBS did on building life cycle assessment, and rainwater harvesting changed the lives of many of us. The work was for many years in the public domain for all to learn from and many did. The materials are still utilized in lectures at architecture schools throughout the southwest. We never did answer the big question but the building continues to inspire Houstonians to be more responsible. Brian Yeoman, Houston City Director, Clinton Foundation; Houston, Texas, Rives Taylor, Director of Sustainable Design, Gensler; Houston, Texas, and George Bandy, Vice President, InterfaceFLOR; LaGrange, Georgia There are people you read about or hear about from others; there are places you read about or hear from others. However, no written or spoken words prepare you for the indelible experience of meeting, in person, Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori, and of visiting their Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. For 35 years, Pliny and Gail, at CMPBS, have relentlessly challenged the status quo of the built environment and its relationship to people and nature. They have offered an incessant stream of ideas, tools, products, processes, and services, alone or in partnership with many other kindred souls, for a better life for people, and for a better place where people live and interact with each other and with nature. Their ultimate goal: a better world for all. This book documents the journey to this goal to date, and at the same time, offers a tantalizing glimpse of the next 35 years and more of commotion. So, Gail and Pliny, a toast for your many accomplishments, and a wish for continued success in your quest… Jorge Vanegas, Ph.D. Dean, College of Architecture at Texas A&M University

Page 24

1978 AREA POINT NETWORK 1987 LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK PROTOCOLS 1998 baselinegreeN-^igreenbal’an^gei 2000 ECOBALANCE 2008 VISIBLEGREEN 2008 PROTOSCOPE

Page 25

ESCAP’PMENT QR CODE GREENFORMS VHLAGE CRYSTAL CITY POLICY, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATION PROTOTYPES ECOSPORTS COMPLEX SEATTLE JUSTICE CENTER UT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER CARRIZO SPRINGS SEATTLE SALMON FRIENDLY BUILDING EAST TEXAS PROJECT LAREDO DEMO. FARM PUERTO CABEZAS HOUSING FOR SIOUX NAnON BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES GREEN URBANISM AT MUELLER ISLAND NATIONS INFTIATIVE AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER PROGRAM ‘TEXAS’ GUIDE TO RAINWATER .HARVESTING^ AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER DEMO. HOME THE CALICHE REPORT SOLAR DECATHLON TEXAS AIM SOLAR DECATHLON HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH THE WORKING ATLAS MSU EPICENTER: EIGHT PRINCIPLES AIA’S ENV. RESOURCE GUIDE COMMUMTC SUPPORTED ARCH.,DELL CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL ECOBALANCE GAME A&E GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS GREENING THE PENTAGON PLANNING FOR MISKITO INDIANS LACEN uiDF TO: HEALTH CARE MISSISSIPPI ^ROHbMF TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE VERANO SUSTAINABLE DEV.

• LEFD™ ASiDENTIAL Nf\WDEV. COMM. BLOCK 21

Page 26

1978 FUNDING: The Menil Foundation PROJECT TEAM: Dorio Bolton Fisk; Pliny Fisk III CMPBS offers a systematic approach to design and planning that is democratic to both nature and humans. From its inception, the Center has approached its work with these objectives in mind, both in-house and within the communities we work with, in the short term and as a means to understand successes and failures in the long term. In essence, the approach we have taken is one of a new type of community organization that works simultaneously at three levels. The first, identifying the land resources and all its life support areas in mapped form (air, water, food, energy, and materials). As the process has evolved, this step has taken into account more and more areas of nature that need reparative management. Second, the people who have intimate knowledge of those resources are equally significant as the accompanying human resources’ partnership with the land. Third, the networks that connect people to people and people to the land. These network resources are an expression of how well the threads of the regional fabric are working. Networks are flows that can be directed to enhance the potentials of a place with the objective of creating more locally than is needed by the populous due to the adroit management of these flows. This type of community organizing has become more crucial as we find ourselves barely holding on to the plethora of skills that once existed-the essence of a land culture. As this procedure has evolved and been woven into things such as the life cycle framework and, more recently ecoBalance Planning and Design, our experiences have progressed from rural to urban where the points are now industries and the networks are that of an industrial ecology. The power of this original vision has helped us read the patterns of development quickly, facilitating our engagement in areas in conflict, strife and disaster. AREA POINT NETWORK

Page 27

A Conceptual Approach Toward the Development of Appropriate Technologies (1978) The Center hos been working in several towns helping develop community based and regionally specific appropriate technologies. To accomplish much of this, we use a methodology that enables us to hunt for resources which are locally available but often untapped. We map indigenous resources at a state level and sometimes at a more local level, showing how this approach can be used in both urban conditions and in small rural towns. Physical resources mapped to date cover a wide range of earth building materials including caliche, adobe, volcanic ash, gypsum, sulfur, alumina clay and fly ash waste. In the larger context, we map climatic resources, physical resources, and human/informational resources. For climatic systems, we map areas of the state where particular passive solar systems are relevant. Some systems covered include reradiating roofs, trombe walls, thermal chimneys, desiccant systems, and earth air heat exchangers We try to do the same thing with water conservation technologies, waste treatment, wind energy, low temperature geothermal, etc. In association with these area resources which map potentials, we also map point resources — that is, points of physical or informational concentration for a given system. In one case, this could be a person who is an expert in adobe soils, in another a caliche brick yard, in a third a passive solar house, and in a fourth an appropriate technology library. From working in the field it is very clear that finding a physical resource alone is useless without being coupled to people with experience and information enough to use it. If none can be found with experience in a particular technology relevant for a specific location as proven by a long history of human settlements in similar biogeographic locations, we try to help create a local example to serve as a regional reference point. But we do so only in response to a local group or individual’s initiative in presenting us with a local need that is unmet and for which local, untapped resources can be marshalled to the benefit of both the ecological and social realms. We find this approach to be effective not just because of its internal logic and simplicity but also because it can easily couple social and energetic issues directly into ecological land planning strategies being used throughout the United States and other parts of the world. It is apparent that given a microregion we can begin to get a feeling of how “together” that region really is in its evolution towards long-term stabilization. Our perspective emerges as we map and look in turn at: 1) the availability of a whole series of local area resources; 2) the cultures existing knowledge and use of these resources through concrete examples; and 3) the regions ability to communicate or network effectively. We look at alternative technologies not as products but as a result of a process and a program that begins to relink us with the environment, its people, and its social mechanisms for information sharing. We design our technologies in response to those processes of the community or region that are revealed by a close examination of each region’s special attributes. What emerges are clear differences and, as a result, diversity of solutions and technologies. What works in dry, clear El Paso, for example, is entirely different from what one would build in hot and humid Houston. Similarly, the earth materials one would use can depend entirely on what materials are locally available and accessible, so that new materials may emerge as potentials that had previously lain fallow and unnoticed. As local differences and a careful adaptation to those differences takes place, each region strengthens its ability to develop within the context of its own special resources and characteristics - and as a result its ability to be self-sufficient grows. In a long- term ecological sense, overall ability to survive grows too - notably because diversity strengthens our adaptability. As we do things closer to home and eliminate the remoteness of time and place in our decisions, our response time is faster. As our situation or resource base changes, we are right on hand to notice, to take action, and to begin to anticipate these shifts because we live in the region we deal with. As the scale of our efforts narrows and becomes locally based and the pace of forces and responses more immediate, the opportunities for free enterprise and lively competition grow. The small entrepreneur has a chance to exercise his/her ingenuity again. When this is not the case, it is not hard to see the unfortunate consequences that can easily result. In New Mexico, for example, adobe is becoming increasingly expensive and is close to the price of conventional building materials so that it is out of reach for the normal person. This has happened partly because there is little to no competition with other indigenous material manufacturers, and because there are emerging tendencies toward price fixing. We are in the midst of a new kind of development in this country that depends for its stability on new kinds of information cind a respect for a different and often much older kind of knowledge. It is in this period where good information on simple regional approaches that are subject to long-term ecological determinants provide the first faltering steps towards a more fail-safe approach. A consistent and clear methodology and a plan for action in this context should be a top priority for local, regional, and state planning and development efforts.

Page 28

1978 A Contextual Framework for the Development of Appropriate Technologies \Ne believe it is timely to expand the general approach from one of rational, supportive argument into a working procedure so that basic processes can be tested over time and regional techniques and methodologies built upon. It is hoped that by introducing a procedure or methodology, an overbearing structure with pigeonholed roles is not the natural outcome. Instead, we would like to think that a region has the capacity of becoming aware of itself and informal ties that we can never hope to identify are enlivened by simple recognition and belief in their potential. NETWORK RESOURCES POINT RESOURCES AREA RESOURCES NETWORK RESOURCEAREA RESOURCE POINT RESOURCE ECOLOGICAL HISTORIC CONSTRAINTS EXAMPLES RESOURCE EXPERIENCE/ POTENTIAL MANUFACTURING MATERIALS STATE & LOCAL LAND COMMISSIONS WATBl POLLUTION PROGRAMS SATELLTTE FEEDBACK SYSTEMS ELECTRONIC COMMUNJCATOON POINT RESOURCE MORPHOLOGY REGIONAL NEWSLETTERS WAGON TRAIN PARTIES AX GUERRILLA THEATER TOURS OF REGIONAL LABS REGIONAL LAB PUBUCATIONS TRAVELLING EXHIBrrS NETWORK MAPPING MORPHOLOGY MAPPING MORPHOLOGY WORKING ATLAS FOR REGION EARTH LAB SOIL PRODUCTMTY TESTS WATER LAB CLIMATE LAB USER GAMING FORMATS RESOURCE RESEARCH SUrrABUJTY INSTTTUTIONS PHYSICAL ACCESS NEWSPAPER COLUMNS/ SUTTABUJTY NEWSLETTERS OWNERSHIP PATTERNS UBRARIES MAPPING MORPHOLOGY AREA RESOURCETO POINT RESOURCE TRANSmONAL TOOLS POINT RESOURCE MORPHOLOGY INFORMAnON CENTERS SKUS AVAILABLE WORKING PROTOTYPES PRODUCT DISTRIBUTION INDIGENOUS BUILDING BIOMASS PASSIVE SOLAR WATER WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVE SOLAR NETWORK MAPPING MORPHOLOGY ECOLOGICAL AT MAPPING PROCESS TO NETWORKING TRANSrnONAL TOOLS COMBINED COST OF USE SOLAR WHERE THE SUN SHINES THE BRIGHTEST AND LONGEST WHAT EXISTING HOUSES CAN BENEFTT FROM THE SUN V/HERE SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLADONS CAN BE DEVELOPED RERADIATION POTENTIAL MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION WIND INFORMATION WHERE THE WINO BLOWS FASTEST RELATIONSHIP OF EXISTING ELECTRIC LINES TO WIND TURBINE STTES WHERE WIND ENERGY CAN BE DEVELOPED MEAN EVAPORATION RATE USABLE FRESH WATER AQUIFERS RERADIATION surTABiLnv COMPLETE FEEDBACK NETWORK POINT TO NETWORK RESOURCE ‘N^mPL^ S^ TRANSmONAL TOOLS BBUEVOLENT SET PO:NT RESOURCE MULTIPLE USE RESOURCE NETWORK RESOURCE PARTIAL FEEDBACK NETWORK

Page 29

1 McHarg Method CMPBS addition Lewis Method CMPBS addition

1. Given a total study area. 7.
2. Features of natural or cultural processes are defined and structured Into broad resource categories. 8. 2a. Continuous identification of a world wide inventory of: 9.

• building with indigenous materials
• passive climate systems 10.
• water conserving principles
• organic food production 11.
• waste utilization
• renewable energy sources based on similar environmental conditions.

3. Features of natural or cultural processes are 12. Inventoried for total study area. 3a. Resource inventories must Include area wide mapping showing applicability of existing or potential native resource conserving building practices.
4. Inventory of features Is supplemented with descriptions of related processes. Comparison of uses of technologically appropriate resource conserving practices for a specific locale.
5. Limiting factors of each process described are identified and related to their features. Resource inventories include historic buildings which exhibit adaptive systems and past/present lifestyles that utilize local resources.
6. Relative value Is attributed to processes. Historic building systems are chosen for further study and monitoring. Having attributed value to the processes, principles are formulated relative to limiting factors. Potential land-uses are considered and possible effect on the limiting factors Is identified. Possible effects of each land-use requirement Is weighed against each limiting factor. Land areas suitable to each land-use are compared. Conflicts between overlapping suitable uses are resolved by comparing economic return. Conflicts resolved on long term basis by monitoring. Demand for these possible uses Is established for their area requirements, and compared with other areas Identified as suitable. Cycle completed from monitoring to replan through feedback. 2a. Given a total study area. Kinds of uses (or activities) to be planned for Identified and the use requirements (or use criteria) are established. Comparison of uses of technologically appropriate resource conserving practices for a specific locale. Continuous Identification of a world wide inventory of:

• building with indigenous materials
• passive climate systems
• organic food production
• waste utilization
• renewable energy sources based on similar environmental conditions A case study area Is selected within which: (a) Resources which meet the above use criteria are identified. (b) Major resources are inventoried and located within case study area (as patterns) on separate transparent overlays. (c) Patterns of major resources are combined Into one pattern. (d) Additional resources are inventoried and located (as patterns) on separate transparent overlays. Additional resource inventories must include area wide mapping showing applicability of existing native or potential native resource conserving building practices. (e) A variety of patterns may be identified for special purposes from a few additional resources. (f) Patterns of additional resources are combined Into one pattern. (g) Patterns of major and additional resources are compared and a correlation between the two is established.

4. Inventory of major resources takes place over total study area.
5. Inventory of additional resources takes place over total study area. Inventories of additional resources include historic buildings which exhibit adaptive systems and past or present lifestyles, that utilize local resources.
6. Points are assigned to major and additional resources.
7. Points are totaled to identify relative priority areas. Historic building systems are chosen for further study and monitoring.
8. Demand for planned uses is established and final priorities and areas are defined.
9. Limitations of each priority are to specific kinds of uses are Identified and specific kinds of uses are assigned to each area. Successful adaptation should depend on long term monitoring tectyniques (e.g. remote sensing techniques).
10. Cycle completed from monitoring to replan through feedback. Some land planning environmentalists (Phil Lewis and Ian McHarg, among others) include a special human component within their regional analysis of historical land markers in order to include them as resources worth conserving. We extend the use of this part of their procedure by relating it more in direct process terms to our area resources and call this phase of our methodology “point resource mapping.” Point resources in our terms relate back to the appropriate technology ethic of demonstrating a technology as possessing some cultural history behind it so that its further application in an area has proper precedent for continued application in a given locale.

Page 30

NETWORK MAPPING SYMBOL Tm-E DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE AREA RESOURCE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION SHOWING THE POTENTIAL USE OF A PARTICULAR APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY DEFINED AREA RESOURCE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION POTENTIAL OF AN APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY AFTER BEING SUBJECTTO ECOLOGICAL LAND PLANNING DETERMINENTS POINT RESOURCE DEMONSTRATES THE LOCATION OF A PARTICULAR APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY IN USE, COINCIDING WTTH FTS AREA RESOURCE (ASSUMING THIS TECHNOLOGY FfTS ECOLOGICAL PARAMETERS) MULTIPLE POINT RESOURCES A POINT RESOURCE THAT UTILIZES A COMBINATION OF AREA RESOURCES EARTH MATERIALS wrrH PASSIVE solar TECHNOLOGY

• —^^ NETWORK RESOURCE DEMONSTRATES THE EXISTENCE OF A REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION BASED ON APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY SOURCE OINT. CAN INCLUDE APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY HARDWARE OR INFORMATION PARTIAL FEEDBACK NETWORK THE EXISTENCE OF ACTUAL EXCHANGE MATERIAL OR ENERGY FOR INFORMATION DEALING WTTH APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY COMPLETE FEEDBACK NETWORK REGIONAL EXAMPLE OF ONE APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGICALLY PRODUCED MATERIAL OR ENERGY FOR ANOTHER AT BASED MATERIAL OR ENERGY, EACH wrTH ITS OWN AREA RESOURCE OVERLAPPING FEEDBACK NETWORK MORE THAN ONE LOCAL SOURCE SUPPLYING SIMILAR APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY LIFE SUPPORT NEEDED SEVERAL EARTH BUILDING DISTRIBUTORS AT ONE LEVEL INCOMPLETE SET BASIC INDIVIDUAL UFE SUPPORT AREA: RESOURCES AND POINT RESOURCES EXISTTING IN AREA BUT LACKING COMBINED USE BY ANY ONE POINT RESOURCE EARTH USE SEPARATE FROM PASSIVE SOLAR, SEPARATE FROM WIND ENERGY USE COMPLETE SET ALL EXISTING AREA RESOURCES MUTUALLY USED BY POINT RESOURCES DIVERSE SET TWO OR MORE COMPLETE SETS (PARAi i n USE OF DIFFERENT AREA: RESOURCES BY A NUMBER OF POm RESOURCES) TWO DIFFERENT EARTH CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES WITH TV/0 DIFFERENT WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES ^^)^^^^9 BENEVOLENT SET A BENEVOLENT ENVIRONIZENT IN WHICH ALL ESSENTIAL UFE SUPPORT EXISTS WITHIN AREA RESOURCES AND ARE BEING RECOGNIZED BY LOCAL POIICT RESOURCES LOCALLY AVAILABLE FOOD PRODUCTION, WATER, BUILDING MATERIALS, PASSIVE SOLAR, ACTIVE SOLAR. AND BIOMASS A network resource essentially shows the existence of communication between disparate point resources The importance of our particular network resource definition lays in its particular roots that lay within a population’s ability to relate for life support on the basic land unit itself. We see a kind of parallel or co-existing set of institutions that are developing side by side with the conventional life support systems. The question becomes to what extent do these parallel systems exist apart from the mother system? Can this, in fact, be placed in terms that measure the extent of long-term socio-environmental stability given our area?

Page 31

POINT RESOURCE SYMBOL GROUP MORPHOLOGY SAN ANTONIO APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY GROUP SAN ANTONIO, TX INFORMATION INDIGENOUS BUILDING PASSIVE CUMATE WATER CONSERVATION SKILL PASSIVE CUMATE BIOMASS ACTIVE SOLAR STRUCTURE PASSIVE CUMATE POSSUM BEND FARM GRANGER. TX INFORMATION WATER CONSERVATION BIOMASS WIND ACTIVE SOLAR SKILL WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVE SOLAR STRUCTURE WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVE SOLAR SYMBIOTIC PROCESSES LAB AUSTIN, TX INFORMATION INDIGENOUS BUILDING BIOMASS WIND SKILL INDIGENOUS BUILDING WIND STRUCTURE INDIGENOUS BUILDING WIND CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS AUSTIN. TX INFORMATION INDIGENOUS BUILDING PASSIVE CUMATE WATER CONSERVATION BIOMASS WIND ACTIVE SOLAR SKILL INDIGENOUS BUILDING PASSIVE CLIMATE WATER CONSERVATION BIOMASS WIND ACTIVE SOLAR STRUCTURE INDIGENOUS BUILDING PASSIVE CUMATE WATER CONSERVATION WIND ACTIVE SOLAR 2 POINT RESOURCE PARTICIPANTS FOR AUSTIN, TX 1 WHEATSVILLE FOOD CO-OP 2 WOODY HILLS FOOD CO-OP 3 NEXUS HOUSING CO-OP 4 ZIGG ORGANIC FARM 5 GREEN BRIAR SCHOOL INDIGENOUS BUILDING SYSTEMS BIOMASS

1. INFORMATION
2. SKILL
3. EXTRACTOR
4. STRUCTURE 1,2.3,4 PASSIVE CLIMATIC SYSTEMS
5. INFORMATION
6. SKILL
7. STRUCTURE
8. INFORMATION
9. SKILL
10. EXISTING TECHNOLOGY WIND ENERGY 1.I NFORMATION
11. SKILL
12. POWER PLANT
13. PRODUCT o<@ INDIGENOUS BUILDING SYSTEMS ACTIVE SOLAR SYSTEMS
14. INFORMATION
15. SKILL
16. EXISTING TECHNOLOGY 1.I NFORMATION
17. SKILL
18. SOLAR SYSTEM
19. PRODUCT Our point resource morphology takes into account people or local institutions as well as built examples from the past. These people, as individuals, groups, or institutions, are looked at in terms of their regional experience. Our keying tries to broaden information about these sources by identifying more than purely technical expertise and tries to include a spectrum such as information gatherers, skill bearers, and producers of appropriate technology products for sale as well as whether they live with a particular life support technology that in actuality supports their own existence.

Page 32

1983 Bioregions and Biotechnologies: A New Planning Tool for Stable Economic Development \Ne find the more we know about our region and its resources, the more useful are our technologies to our constituents since the technologies reflect — in ci sense grow out of — our indigenous resource base. In our quest to understand what makes some technology transfers work, while others are embarrassing failures, we turned to our background in ecological land analysis. Our first step was to map the location of resources upon which our regional technologies are based. We then extended this mapping procedure by identifying other regions around the world where our technologies could be used due to the presence of these same resources. We have found that there are different levels through which a technology becomes a regionally-derived biotechnology, and it appears that the identification of these levels helps not only in information sharing within a global biome, but also represents a strategy for development once we are working at the province level. REALM BIOME REGION PROVINCE BIOME control inter bioregional communication AREA PHYSICAL RESOURCES HUMAN POINT RESOURCES NETWORK RESOURCES Each of the three levels of biotechnical recognition represents a deeper, more integrated incorporation a region s technology. Therefore, the technologies that are most worthy of being transferred fit all levels of recognition. HUMAN RESOURCES BIOTECHNOLOGIES PHYSICAL LIFE SUPPORT RESOURCES NEEDS PHYSICAL RESOURCES HUMAN RESOURCES ____BIOTECHNOLOGIES LIFE SUPPORT NEEDS WATERSHED HOLDING CAPACrTY When biotechnologies are brought together to represent the entire means of human life support within a region, we find that there are eight basic human life support categories: food, water, energy, waste disposal, building materials, climatic comfort, clothing, and medicine. Many of the biotechnical life support categories are based on vegetative and animal resources and, when broken down to the physical resources upon which they depend, we find that many of the other human life support categories also depend on these same resources. Many of the biogeographic resource categories can be directly related. Our procedure for applying appropriate biotechnologies begins with the resources found at the province level. The most convenient spatial unit with which to plan and manage these biotechnologies is the watershed found within each province. Thus, our bioregional exchange model actually begins with the watershed as the organizing entity. Once we have identified a particular provincial watershed boundary, the specific resources within the watershed that can fulfill all eight categories of human life support requirements can be isolated. This resource base is not confined to the watershed but overlays it.

Page 33

1985 Towards Sustainable Building: Community Economic Impact Using Indigenous Affordable Housing Strategies As we progress from area to network resources, we realize that as more complex relationships occur, the region’s stability is enhanced so that, in a sense, the more grounded the human institutions are to each other and to the region they serve. This, then, can be used as a gauge to determine the amount of work that must be done to bring the region into a stable and sustainable state: the more interconnections, the more stable and therefore less work that is required. POINT NETWORK BIOME INVENTORY INPUT / OUTPUT NETWORK ASSESSMENT NEEDS ASSESSMENT PHYSICAL /HUMAN RESOURCE ASSESSMENT WORLD WIDE BIOME INVENTORY PROJECT BOUNDARY IDENTIFICATION REGIONAL POINT RESOURCE ASSESSMENT ^^= NETWORK RESOURCE - CALICHE SCHOOL DORMITORY AREA RESOURCE POINT RESOURCES SAND GRAVEL CLAY PRIMARY PRODUCTION BATCHING PLANT CONCRETE CAIICHF CALICHE BLOCK CEDAR LUMBER LIMESTONE CUT STOCK SECONDARY PRODUCTION NETWORK RESOURCES - STRAW / CLAY HOUSE NETWORK RESOURCES - SAWDUST/ CALICHE SCOUT QUARTERS AREA RESOURCES POINT RESOURCES SECONDARY PRODUCTION AREA POINT RESOURCES RESOURCES PRIMARY PRODUCTION SECONDARY PRODUCTION MESQUlIt: WHEAT/ OAT CLAY COAL WATER CELLULUSt: WASTE SAND GRAVE! PRIMARY PRODUCTION MESQUrrE FLOOR TILES WHEAT CHAFF STRAW CLAY INSULATTON FLY ASH CONCRETE FLY ASH CEMENT FLY ASH PAPER RECYCUNG CELLULOSE INSULATION CEDAR MESQUITE SAND GRAVEL CALICHE POZZOLAN ftkWATER MESQUrTE TTLE FLOOR /CEDAR PLANKING POZZOLAN CONCRETE POZZOLAN CEMENT POZZOLAN PROCESSING UME SAWDUST BLOCK CALICHE BLOCK

Page 34

1987 Coming to Grips with the Sysfemics of Sustainability Within a region, material flows are not only virgin materials processed to make building materials, which then can be used in an ecologically planned and designed structure, but also wastes that are transformed into by-product resources, with the establishment of appropriate processing facilities. Together, these form a material cycle not unlike those of natural systems. In these finely tuned linkages, survival is dependent on the ability to conserve and reuse material resources in tight loops, allowing for the least amount of material to escape the system, and valuing by-products as if they were virgin resources. AREA RESOURCES (NATURAL) POINT RESOURCES (COMMUNrTY) MATERIALS: ORGANIC CLIMATE ENERGY EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS ENERGY EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTORS rijl SOLAF y.i WIND WEADHERIZATION INDUSTRIES HYDROLOGY CISTERN MANUFACTURERS / TANK GRADERS “HhUIPnAllUN ’^nnuNn WATCT WELL DRILLERS / M.U.0.S WATER CONSERVATION INDUSTRIES MATERIALS: MINERALS FARM TANK SEALERS ✓LAY JMESTONE / CALICHE SOAI LIME MANUFACTURERS COAL FRED POWER PLANTS COMPOST PRODUCERS COMPOST DISTRIBUTORS INSULATION tZANUFACTURERS VEGETATION NATIVE PLANT NURSERIES ilVHEAT WASTE DAT WASTE HYACINTH COMPOST SAWDUST PAPFR WACTC t^Ubl OAK 5AVANNAI- BLACK LAND PRAIRIE CROSS TIMBER & PRAIRIE EDWARDS PLATEAU LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS SOLAR WATER HEATERS WINDMILLS PHOTOVOLTAICS CALICHE PITS LOCAL TRANSPORTERS

Page 35

ON-SITE NETWORKS COMMUNrTY ENTERPRISES INFRASTRUCTURE SOLAR COLLECTOR DISTRIBUTOR HOME GARDENERS JUNK CAR CRUSHING PLANT RENEWABLE ENERGY HARDWARE STORE NATIVE PLANT NURSERY & DIST. STUCCO APPLICATORS FLY ASH CEMENT BATCHING FACIUTY CALICHE FLY ASH BLOCK CAR WASH METHANE GAS COMPANY FLY ASH INSULATION PRINCETON PARK ELECTRIC UTILTTY SPRAY PAPER INSULATION COMPOST MANUFACTURER / DIST. GREEN BELT WALKING & BIKE PATHS STREETS RESTAURANT FACIUTY CAR WASH FACILTTY CONVENIENCE STORE COMMERCIAL HOT WATER RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY HOT WATER RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RUNOFF SYSTEM INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS COMMODE FLUSH WATER CAR BARNS WARM NUTRIFIED WATER WASTE TREATMENT PLANT SUPERSTRUCTURE GARDEN CISTERN H20 ENTRY POND WATER PUMP HYACINTH WASTE TREATMENT HYACINTH TREATED WATER STREET UGHTING PRINCETON PARK WATER COMPANY SHRIMP/ CRAYFISH INDUSTRY GREENHOUSES

Page 36

1987 FUNDING: Ann R. Roberts Fund; Rubin Foundation; Stem Fund PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Gail Vittori We can claim neither the origin nor the original use of the Life Cycle Framework. What we can say is that we have pushed, cajoled, and virtually lived this language in nearly every way. Our original forays created for us, and to some extent the world outside, a recognition of how life cycle can organize a multitude of things around us. Where things come from and where they end up developed the basis for our conceptual diagrams and essential organization for the City of Austin s Green Builder Program, recognized at the 1992 U.N. Earth Summit in Rio. Our somewhat daring act of including this thought process at the city scale was ennobled by the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), not because they were remotely thinking about cities but rather, that a scientific organization used it. At that time, their work gave us the courage to suggest a framework that could be incorporated at the city and regional levels and also within a building and its subsequent activities. From that point on, life cycle became an obsession. Today our obsession has evolved into how behavior represented by an icon system can be used to augment resource balancing habits throughout several CMPBS projects including: the Texas A&M Solar Decathlon, our work with VisibleGreen at the pedestrian and city levels, the EcoSports Complex where life cycle feedback helped make the complex operate, and influenced the groForm Haiti efforts of how a family could balance resource use based on the life cycle framework. LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK

Page 37

Towards a Theory and Practice of Sustainable Design (1992) The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) measures the total impact of resource utilization, including sourcing, transportation, manufacturing, use, reuse, recycling, and disposal. Resource mapping becomes the base of the LCA ladder, while global biomes set the stage for understanding the prerequisites for these mapped resources. The organizational framework can open interdisciplinary fields of inquiry spatially bound by the biome system at one scale, be as general as needed, and incorporate highly technical information. By doing so, the approach can become operational to the point of mathematical modelling. The capacity for an icon to represent more complex formulations and even programs that can be related to other programs (or icons) to build up a design that simultaneously “reads out” in actual performance criteria is possible due to the new tools offered in the field of object oriented programming, or OOPs. The basic LCA theme or ladder, as we call it, includes: source; transport and distribution; manufacture, process, and formulation; use, maintenance; and reuse, recycling, and storage. The manufacturing and processing component includes such resources as energy input and water. The ladder shows product tracking from virgin and by-product sources and is described in pictorial forms, or icons. Any scale ladder may be viewed as a simple rating system. This can best be described when considering the difference in scale between one ladder and the next. For example, city regions can be rated by comparing one city region to another world wide within their biome scale context as to how those city sustainably treat their resources. Already in the United States, “environmental report cards” prepared by Renew America show how one state ranks relative to another. Now we are talking about the beginnings of a rating system based on sustainable principals. This is different than an environmental report card, which is primarily concerned with “sink” conditions and their affect on the planet. As we have shown, sustainability deals with cycles, sources as well as sinks and all the steps in between. The problem in fully conceptualizing sustainability is that it admits to a far more complex system than one-dimensional impact assessments. Thus, the issue confronting us is how to present this complex system in terms that are usable and understandable by people. In 1990, our Center suggested to the City of Austin, Texas that they extend their award-winning Energy Star Rating Program into a procedure that would encompass a broader range of sustainable resource issues including water, waste, building materials, and energy from a perspective beyond conservation. The task was formidable in that rating for energy conservation was based on the efficiency of appliances and how a house performed as a processor of energy in terms of heating and cooling. The fact that integration was a far more important concept to get across to participants in the program actually ran counter in some respects to the conservation program that was being used. The most straight forward procedure resulting from our study came to view the LCA Ladder as the core of the rating technique by simply admitting the importance of being able to track any given issue regarding resource use to each step in the ladder itself. The fact that making one step in the ladder was significant enough that a point was assigned; thus, one was able to track any given action even one step. To know who manufactured something, where the virgin resources came from, what means of transport was used and thus how far it came were important enough that this knowledge could trigger a more in-depth understanding of that particular process. It is this connection that has become so significant and so critical in a world in which all the ecological disruption is due to the fact that we are unable to trace where things are coming from and where they are going, which is critical information to determine the potential of relative sustainability of any particular process.

Page 38

1987 Coming to Grips with the Systemics of Sustainability Establishing linkages between examples of regionally relevant resource use and identifying how these examples affect the local economy highlights the crucial inter-relationship between regionalization and the built environment. The range of practitioners involved in a regionally-based procedure can unite the often isolated steps of planning, design, construction, and manufacturing, making possible an information-rich connection. Even at the home scale, it is possible to integrate individual building processes to enable multiple functions, thus enhancing the home’s overall operating efficiency. When these processes are viewed as connectors of several different resource flows, one can establish an audit system based on flows rather than efficiency. When the home is viewed as a utility system, and when passive solar design features are the basis for the grid, one cannot dissect the home into discrete parts, since all parts operate synergistically and are optimized in the presence of others. Such a home can be a micro-manifestation of a regions metabolism. SOURCE CALICHE MANUFACTURE USE CALICHE BLOCK DUMP TRUCK BLOCK MACHINE BLOCK HAULING BLOCK UFE:’ LREUSE REGIONAL TRANSPORT RE-USE/ RECYCLE STORE LOCAL TRANSPORT SUSTAINABLE BUILDING COMPONENT The basic format of life cycle assessment begins with source (S) and progressess to regional transport (T), processing (P), local transport (t), use (U) and finally, reuse |R). These LCA relationships are fundamental to any physical process undertaken by people and other life forms. INDIGENOUS RESOURCE LADDER CAUCHE DUMP TRUCK BLOCK lAACHINE BLOCK HAULING CALICHE BLOCK BLOCK LIFE: REUSE MESOUTTE WOOD SAW MILL TILE HAULING WOOD TILE TILE UFE; REUSE TREE HAULING BY-PRODUCT RESOURCE LADDER SAW MILL BLOCK MACHINE BLOCK HAULING INSULATING BLOCK SAWDUST BLOCK UFE ABSORBENT/ RERADIATING TRICKLE ROOFS LAP POOL SWIMMING CISTERN AQUATIC PLANT GARDEN MULTI-USE STEfA WALL V AC CLIMATE CONTROL SWIMMING POOL CrTY/WELL WATER SUPPLY CHLORINE TREATMENT FOUNDATION STRUCTURE WATER WATER CISTERN WALLS PURE WATER STORED WATER GARDEN WALL RAIN WATER RAIN WATER RAIN WATER WATER TREATMENT LOAD TRANSFER WATER TREATMENT CIRCULATION ‘-i|Mi irur! CIRCULATION PUMP SUNLIGHT pyMp TYPICAL BUILDING COMPONENT The abjective is a system based on activities accomplished on the smallest scale possible. This would prevent the inefficiency of long, drawn out linkages whose efficiency loss is the mathematical product of the number of linkages. The resulting home environment brings with it opportunities for diversity and many alternative paths for energy and material flows. Integrating Life Cycle Assessment Ladder. An input / output matrix , for the building profession.

Page 39

!
I E3 IOE3Ol ■I* 12.^ | ROOF| UP DRAFT STRAW BALE | FOUNDATION| || FLY ASH .STUCCO VAPOR I BARRIER । I WHrTE L.METAL ROOF FLY ASH CONCRETE FOUNDATION WHfTE METAL ROOF r VAPOR BARRIER DOWN DRAFT ,| COOL TOWER1 J THERMAL , MASS TRANSPORT USE SOURCE] ’ SFTE BOUNDARY PROCESS TRANSPORT Information flows are manifested by good sustainable design, engineering, and planning which reflect an implicit understanding of the region. Design which uses information in an ecological context to promote sustainable methods in the built environment is called “information ecology” (in the same way we speak of “industrial ecology”). Information ecology can occur in many forms, including the building itself, and can become the basis for an icon-formatted information directory. This directory can provide many layers of information from any single icon, and can be extended as reward systems and as a straightforward database to provide immediate information on material specifications. Essentially, the icon vocabulary establishes the basis for a sustainable design language, with a structure based on LCA.. TRANSPORT TRANSPORT HOLDING TANKPOTABLE SINKPOTABLE WATER CrrY WATER SRE BOUNDARY RAINWATER - CITY WATER ft ICON MOCK-UP The capacity to structure appropriate icons according to a life cycle assessment, is illustrated above. The system is designed to enable a non-technically trained person to change products and consumption patterns until the quality and quantity of water provided from the roof fulfills the family’s entire water needs. The model follows the life cycle assessment sequence in graphic and mathematical form. This system s basic structure is the life cycle assessment. It is used not only as a tracking tool to determine where materials are coming from and going to, but, more importantly, as the structure for modelling the system’s performance.

Page 40

1992 Towards a Theory and Practice of Sustainable Design Resource mapping becomes the base of the Life Cycle Assessment ladder, while global biomes set the stage for understanding the prerequisites for these mapped resources There is a capacity for an icon to represent more complex formulations and even programs that can be related to other programs (or icons) to build up a design that simultaneously “reads out” in actual performance. LARGER DATA SMALLER LCA LADDER SOURCE TO SINK SOFT (pictorial) HARD (numerical) SCALE ICONO-MAPS ICONO-GRAPHS ICONS Efficiency of scale and even issues of time, energy efficiency, etc. could be better Depth of understanding is enhanced by the fact that a hierarchy of icons enables dealt with through integrated scalar conditions. Depicted is the relationship pictorial or symbolic depth in a way that parallels performance depth, between scale changes on the vertical axis, a similar scale working along the LCA ladder, and an end date which starts simply at a pictorial icon level and progresses in depth relative to performance information. WHEN REGIONAL WOOD SOURCES ARE USED AND MANAGED WHEN WOOD WASTE HAS BEEN RE-USED PROPERLY FROM SOURCE TO SINK WHEN WOOD IS PURCHASED THRU LOCAL GUTTERS AND DISTRIBUTORS WHEN COMBUSTION TECHNIQUES ARE MANUFACTURED ACCORDING TO THE PARAMETERS OF LOCAL SPECIES WHEN DESIGN, INTEGRATION, INSTALLATION ARE DONE EFFICIENTLY AND OCCUR THRU LOCAL COMPANIES 6 BIO-THERMAL LCA LADDER SEQUENCE SCORING The LCA ladder became the core of the Austin Green Builder Program rating technique by simply admitting the importance of being able to track any given resource use issue to each step in the ladder. Making one step in the ladder was significant enough that a point is assigned.

Page 41

1996 Life Cycle Design Principles for the Architecture and Planning Professions Performance objectives are specified to reflect a region’s particular material and energy balance conditions. These are determined by the extent of human activity relative to the natural environment’s capacity to supply, transport and absorb these activities over time. Performance is evaluated through a protocol that correlates operational goals to boundary sets chosen through sets of both political considerations and natural conditions. The built environments life cycle inputs and outputs must relate to operational components familiar to the practitioner; these become operational subsets of the building’s metabolism (e.g. operating energy, water, building materials, wastewater and solid waste). The sub-building assemblages incorporate the source to re-source stages familiar to life cycle practitioners, but acknowledge the many boundary conditions within which activities occur. Scales become programmable sequences that may result in an imbalance of material or energy conditions at one scale which then require incorporation at the next scale of human activity. 100% 70% 48% 34% 24% 17% — — — ------- J ---------L 1 2 3 4 5 6 RELATIVE NUMBER OF STAGES EFFICIENCY WITHIN THE LIFE CYCLE LOW EFFICIENCY HIGH -> O Z O O O o o ” III Working with construction and mechanical systems of reduced mechanical complexity aids both in information gathering and processing for environmental impact evaluation, and in the ability to integrate one technology with another. IMPACT A.I. IMPACT 8.1.3 IMPACT C.1. IMPACT C.1.3 IMPACT 8.1 IMPACT C.1 IMPACT A.1 LOW IMPACT HIGH O O 11 il Z O WHEN ALL UFE CYCLE STAGES ARE GEOGRAPHICALLY SEPARATED TYPE 2 WHEN SOURCING ALONE OCCURS ON SCTE BUT ALL OTHER LIFE CYCLE STEPS EXCEPT “USE- ARE REMOTE WHEN PROCESSING OCCURS AT TO-IE SOURCE (IE. PORTABLE LUMBER MILL) TYPE 4 BY COMBINING TRANSPORT AND DISTRIBUTION INTO A SINGULAR REGIONAL ACTIVRY WHEN PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING OCCUR AT POINT OF USE (I.E. SCTE BUILT ROOF TRUSSES) TYPE 6 WHEN SOURCE TRANSPORT, PROCESS MANUFACTURING OCCUR AT POINT OF USE (I E. PRESSED SOIL BLOCK) TYPE 7 WHEN ALL PROCESSES OCCUR ON SOE INCLUDING THE REUSE OF PRODUCT (I.E. INTERLOCKING PRESSED SOIL BLOCK) A life cycle impact analysis parallels the LCA methodology by evaluating each stage of the life cycle including primary. Efficiency is increased by the reduction secondary, and tertiary impacts The resulting impact chain with stressors and impacts is consistent with E.P.A Guidelines. in the number of life cycle stages.

Page 42

1998 FUNDING: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency PROJECT TEAM: Bill Bavinger: Pliny Fisk III; Rich MacMoth; Greg Norris; Gail Vittori; Bob Berkebile, Hal Levin, Jason McLennan. Joel Ann Todd (advisory team) BaselineGreen, an environmental/economic assessment tool for materials, baselines manufacturing processes based on NAICS code by integrating the Bureau of Economic Analysis economic national input/output model with the U.S. EPA’s data on emissions to air, water and land. BaselineGreen provides a hierarchical display of the approximate 12.5 million U.S. businesses, the construction industries’ constributions to these emissions and associated job creation potential; and tracks specific phases of the 18 MasterFormat specification building areas with detail. The project, funded through a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cooperative Agreement under the guidance of James White, was applied to several projects including the School of Nursing and Student Community Center at the University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston; The Seattle Justice Center; and the Agenda for Salmon Friendly Building technical report. GreenBalance develops the metric to report results from the BaselineGreen assessment, and provides a life cycle balancing methodology using an input- output analysis of the businesses involved. A related methodology. Carbon Dioxide Intensity Ratio, balances embodied carbon using a specific mix of materials at multiple scales: from a chair to a city. It profiles the life cycle carbon dioxide impacts of exterior and interior construction materials and shows which is carbon positive (+ carbon) and which is carbon negative (- carbon). It also provides a spreadsheet to track materials by weight and type. This enables an iterative process and decision support structure to achieve a net zero embodied carbon building. BASELINEGREEN™ - GREENBALANCE™

Page 43

BciselineGreen and GreenBalance: A Step Beyond Sustainability in Building Performance (1998) CMPBS has been developing several procedures using on an inter-operational framework based on the life cycle structure. These procedures span between land use planning, incorporating the land area footprints necessary to balance the sourcing and re-sourcing of human needs at or near a site, to tools for baselining and balancing the economic and environmental burdens associated with fourteen major building types so that a city or region can start establishing the criteria upon which to develop a green building agenda. The present incorporation of these tools has been tremendous while others, such as the potential for using these methods for establishing a regionalized industrial ecology plan, are still on the horizon. At this time, we are fortunate to be incorporating our approach nationwide; from land use planning work on projects totaling 10,000 acres to developing guidelines and green specifications for the interior of the U.S. Pentagon, and helping set up the City of Seattle Green Building Program where, for the first time, regional planning of procurement is being considered according to life cycle requirements. BaselineGreen is based on the input / output model of the U.S. economy “overlaid” with the environmental impacts per dollar for all the SIC codes so that a per dollar value for that product or service can be represented in environmental impact as well as economic terms. This relationship is then linked through approximately 8000 descriptors to the CSI / Uniformat specification procedures. In this manner, buildings are linked directly to the economic and environmental impact models of the U.S. BaselineGreen first examines the upstream external environmental cost and regional employment impacts of the upstream external environmental costs are summarized in an “external environmental cost ratio” (EECR). The upstream employment impacts are summarized in an “employment impact ratio” (EIR). Both an EECR and an EIR are assigned to all high priority inputs to construction within major architectural Uniformat Building Group Element categories of the baseline building. Second, BaselineGreen establishes a new “greener” baseline with reduced upstream environmental costs. This green baseline becomes the new benchmark for measuring the proposed building design. Following the BaselineGreen analysis, the GreenBalance assessment provides a framework to go beyond the present approach of simply minimizing environmental burdens. GreenBalance attempts to neutralize or “balance” these conditions with the objective of mitigating and, in some cases, actually counteracting external environmental costs.

Page 44

1997 Establishing National Measurable Goals for Total Quality Building Modeling tools have been developed to design buildings relative to energy use and pollution impacts in a place specific manner. Benchmarking techniques have been applied mostly in production facilities to optimize internal efficiency with some consideration of environmental impact. ISO 14000 attempts to develop international protocols to minimize environmental impacts of production. This emerging procedure attempts to benchmark building relative to the environment using some techniques mentioned above but correlates them to a GIS input/output based on modeling framework so that location sensitive issues regarding material and energy flows relative to environment and resource use can be measured. The main objective is to evaluate a building as a performance system in a site sensitive context. Site is defined in a multiple scalar measurement depending on resource and technology. 1 These maps demonstrate the variations in scale within the Total Quality Building procedure. Mathematical capability is built-in to the point of using a 5 foot by 5 foot grid size with each cell independent or communicating with all other cells. The five foot grid was chosen in order to link to the module used for factory floor planning. Cells are clustered to represent each ERA region. ALL 3.069 CONTERMINOUS COUNTIES 48 CONTERMINOUS STATES FINANCIAL BENEFTTS VS K/- POLLUTION $100 MILLION RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION READY MDC CONCRETE SIC 3273 SAWMILLS AND PLANING MILLS SIC 2421 7.5 MINUTE GRID TOTAUNG 52.480 GRID CELLS FOR THE CONTIGUOUS UNTTED STATES 10 EPA REGIONS

Page 45

1998 BaselineGreen and GreenBalance: A Step Beyond Sustainability in Building Performance BaselineGreen indicates which material and product types of the baseline building have the lowest EECR and should therefore replace types with higher EECR values. Once the EECR and EIR values have been determined for the baseline building, ways to improve the environmental performance (i.e., reduce the external environmental costs) of the inputs to construction are considered This “greener” baseline building is the BaselineGreen Benchmark. The upstream environmental burdens of material and product types are evaluated and low-embodied energy, recycled content / by-product, and locally/regionally available materials are substituted for high-embodied energy, high environmental impact raw materials. BASELINE BUILDING BASELINEGREEN B20- EXTERIOR CLOSURE C30 - INTERIOR FINISHES C10- INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION A10- |bio- FOUNDATIONS SUPER-STRUCTURE NOTES: I.) * Denotes equal contribution to environmental burden indicator. 2.) The Miscellaneous and Service Sector categories have been omitted. UNIFORMAT LEVEL 2 BUILDING GROUP ELEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN RANKING COMBINED
RANKING FINAL RANKING AIR
POLLUTION GLOBAL
WARMING TOXIC
RELEASES C30 INTERIOR FINISHES 2 2 I 5 I B10 SUPERSTRUCTURE I I 4 6 2 B20 EXTERIOR CLOSURE 4* 3* 3 I0 3 D50 ELECTRICAL 4* 5 2 I1 4 AIO FOUNDATIONS 3 3* 8 14 5 D30 HVAC 7 6 5 18 6 CIO INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION 6 7 6 19 7 D20 PLUMBING 8 8 7 23 8 B10 SUPERSTRUCURE Inputs to Construction % CONTRIBUnON CUMULATTVE %

1. Ready mixed concrete 39.8% 39.8%
2. Fabricated structural iron, steel, and aluminum for buildings 19.0% 58.8%
3. Cement, hydraulic 17.4% 763%
4. Fabricated structural metal, not elsewhere classified 4.4% 80.6%
5. Hardwood & softwood lumber, rough & dressed, except siding 43% 84J)%
6. Fabricated bar joists and conc. reinforcing bars 3.7% 88.6%
7. Structural wood products 2.8% 91.4%
8. Structural shapes, sheet piling, & conc. reinforcing bars 2.4% 93.8% 9, Other fabricated structural metal, not elsewhere classified 23% 96.1%
9. Rough & dressed lumber — treated, not edged 1.6% 97.7% UNIFORMAT LEVEL AND CATEGORY_______________________________| EECR COST/S | EIR JOBS/SM LEVEL! A SUBSTRUCTURE LEVEL 2 A10 FOUNDATIONS & A20 BASEMENT CONSTRUCTION______________________________________________ INPUTS TO CONST. Cement, hydraulic 232 51.01 Structural shapes, sheet piling, and concrete reinforcing bars 0.61 1801 Ready mix concrete 0.49 15.49 Fabricated bar joists and concrete reinforcing bars 034 1170 Wood poles, piles, & posts 0.16 22.89 LEVEL! B SHELL LEVEL 2 B10 SUPERSTRUCTURE_________________________________________________________________________________ INPUTS TO CONST. Cement, hydraulic 232 51.01 Structural shapes, sheet pilings, & concrete reinforcing bars 0.61 17.81 Ready mix concrete 0.49 15.47 Fabricated bar joists and concrete reinforcing bars 034 11.78 Fabricated structural iron, steel, aluminum for buildings 033 1334 Fabricated structural metal, nee 033 13.85 Other fabricated structural metal 033 13.85 Hardwood & softwood lumber, rough & dressed, exc. siding 030 1634 Rough & dressed lumber, treated 0.16 23.04 Structural wood products 0.12 17.68 LEVEL 2 B20 EXTERIOR CLOSURE INPUTS TO CONST. Gypsum building materials 0.63 12.70 Brick and structural clay tile 0.41 1837 Concrete block and brick 038 1532 Other glass products including tempered, multiple glazed, & stained 036 27.83 Interior and exterior architectural solvents and paints 035 N/A Commercial and industrial metal doors and frames 034 1439 Residential metal doors and frames 034 14.60 Building and construction plastic foam products 034 109.86 After all upstream inputs to construction are categorized according to Uniformat Level 2 Building Group Elements, the elements are ranked according to each of the three environmental burdens. An overall “final ranking is given, including the combined rankings for all three burdens. For each input to construction within the major Uniformat Level 2 Building Group Elements, material substitutes have decreased the external environmental cost ratio (EECR). In some cases this reduction can be more than 50%.

Page 46

2000 BaselineGreen: A Green Building Design Methodology This analytical framework is being designed to enable analysis of building and construction, along with other (and all) of the 474 other industry types that make up the U.S. economy It has been built by careful pooling and integrating numerous federal data resources into a whole-systems analytical framework that traces the regional, environmental and economic consequences of generic building designs, product design, final consumer demand, and policies which might affect one or more of these. The approach is based on the interconnections between four fundamental tools: 1) Baselining environmental impacts of 489 industrial categories within the U.S. economy according to region; 2) Correlating Construction Specifications Institute and ASTM categorization systems; 3) Depicting impacts graphically of all major facets of building and support utilities; 4) Showing in GIS format where the condition effects local environment/economies. BUILDING COMPLEX SPECIFICATION INPUT / OUTPUT UFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT SPECIFICATION TOOL ECONOMIC INPUT / OUTPUT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BOUNDARIES IDENURED AIR SYSTEM WATER SYSTEM FOOD SYSTEM ENERGY PASSIVE 500 SIC / BEA SECTORS ENERGY ACTIVE MATERIAL RENEWABLE l^UUbUt^ SECTORS BUILDING SUBSYSTEM MODELED IN LIFE CYCLE PHASES 7000 COMMOOFTY TYPES 12.500 DESCRIPTORS 384 CSI / UNIFORMAT SPECIFICAJION SUBDIVISIONS BUUNUAHIES IDENTIFIED C02 EMISSIONS C02 MATHllAL NON-RENEWABLE CO2 EMISSIONS EMISSIONS CO2 EMISSIONS GUZ EMISSIONSOFF-SITE MINING. MANUFACTUhinu. biu ON-SITE / OFF-SITE UP STREAM SOURCE. TRANSPORT. PROCESS. DISTRIBUTE DIRECT CONSTRUCT USE OPERATE DOWN STREAM DE.MOLISH. RE-PROCESS, RE-USE BASELINE COMPARISON BUILDING RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIALINDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL TRANSPORTATION C02 EMISSIONS C02 OMITTED EMISSIONS C02 EMISSIONS OFF-SOE MINING, MANUFACTURING. ETC. <1 ON-SrTE ON-SITE / OFF-SnE CO2 EMISSIONS UP STREAM SOURCE. TRANSPORT. PROCESS, DISTRIBUTE CONSTRUCT DIRECT USE OPERATE DOWN STREAM )EM0LISH, RE-PROCESS. RE-USE UFE CYCLE BALANCING LIFE CYCLE BALANCING We naw possess an operational translator between the existing model and common specification standards so that architects/engineers can benchmark each facet of any building type according to CSI and Uniformat standards. [top diagram] The typical upstream and downstream carbon dioxide life cycle of a building, [bottom diagram] One means of balancing carbon dioxide upstream with the sequestering power of material use downstream. VVAitM ^UKKLY INFKAblKUUJUHL BLAST FURN. & STEEL MILLS CONC. PROD. (EXC. BLOCK) PIPES. VALVES, FITTINGS FAB. PLATE WORK CEMENT HYDRAUUC C LIFE CYCLE BALANCING - WATER SUPPLY MAINTENANCE S REPAIR F PIPES, VALVES, FFTTINGS G FAB. STRUCT. METAL H READY-MDC CONCRETE I MISC. STRUCT. METAL J ELECTRIC SERVICES K CEMENT, HYDRAULIC L MISC PLASTICS M CONC. PROD. (EXC. BLOCK) UNIFORMAT LEVEL 2 GROUP ELEMENTS UNIFORMAT LEVEL 3 INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS SPECIFIED TEMS EXTERIOR CLOSURE EXTERIOR WALLS GLASS PANELS + 871 LB CO, WINDOW FRAMES + 38 LB CO, EXT. INFILL WALLS EXT. INFILL WALL FRAMES

• 804 LB CO, +16 LB CO, +121 LB CO, SUPERSTRUCTURE FLOOR , CONSTRUCTION i /r-l //""l FLOOR -4,710 LB CO, SLAB + 3520 LB CO, BEAMS - 800 LB CO, GIRDERS + 5580 LB C0, COLUMNS +4100 LB CO,

• 7690 LB CO, The result of identifying national impact data of the electrical supply. From this baseline information, the designer/engineer develops a new benchmark using life cycle balancing procedures An attempt has been made to calculate the net CO2 impact at scales ranging from office furniture to an enclosed office space to a typical building structural bay. In each case, the goal is to achieve a CO2 balance at each scale.

Page 47

COUNTRY STATE Non-Attainment Status

1 Dot = 1

r—-1 Emissions In Travis Emissions in U.S. __ O - 2668 L—12669 - 17155 r—317157 -35220 r-—135221 — 114090 Emissions in Texas 0 -449 : 450 - 1992 1993 - 6201 i 71 6202-13887 [top diagram] The country, state and county economic benefits of locally sourcing some of the inputs of the Seattle Justice Center, [bottom diagram] System capabilities can overlay on a county-by-county display using a geographic information systems environment to reveal spatial impacts. This map clearly demonstrates how building construction in one geographic area in the U.S. may effect totally different geographic areas environmentally.

Page 48

2000 FUNDING: The Educational Foundation of America PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Rich MacMath; John Motloch; Fabien Prou- vost; Rodolpho Romina The related procedures of ecoBalance Planning and Design address first order Spatial areas using the five life cycle stages: source, transport, manufacture, use, re-source. These can be tracked during any scale of site development and building design. EcoBalance is fundamentally aligned with the all-important word cycle withn the phrase “life cycle”. It ameliorates impact within different scalar boundaries — from home to community — by actually including the steps (and areas) necessary to balance a particular resource use; air, water, energy, materials, and food. EcoBalance operates at any scale taking into account the eco-technology including the area that the technology takes up as land area support systems. EcoBalance draws from Permaculture and procedures expounded by ZERI, the Zero Emissions Research Institute. We have used ecoBalance at many scales, from communities comprised of five families to towns of 20,000 people. ECOBALANCE™

Page 49

EcoBdlcince: A Sustainable Land Use Planning and Design Methodology (2009) EcoBalcince is a sustainable land use planning and design method using the principle of life cycles as the framework for sustaining basic life support. The method was developed in order to come to grips with how space within buildings, as well space as in land use planning, needs to respond to requirements that now go beyond the simple conservation based methods of the past and into procedures more in sympathy with sustaining resources through balanced use. Today, the discussion in nearly every sector of the green agenda include carbon balancing, zero energy, zero waste, and material balance along with others that seem to be coming online almost daily. During the building or land planning process, space uses are conceived and analyzed according to the footprints required to supply and re-source basic hu’man life support requirements of air, water, food, energy, and materials in a regenerative fashion. The ecoBalance method is based on the understanding that sustainability is measurable according to the degree in which a balanced holding capacity exists between human needs and our ability to adroitly manage the environment through a series of nature augmenting technologies that are conceived in a manner where there exists a positive relationship between human actions and that of natures requirements. Whether at an individual building scale or a site planning level, the framework is essentially the same. EcoBalancing requires technical sophistication rooted within the ecological potential of a particular place. Connecting life-supporting technologies to the land from which our resources originate is the core of the ecoBalance process. We chose to move from this level inward to make sure that the building itself entailed as much balance as possible before going to the entire site, although this could have easily been reversed. The particular technologies represented for our demonstration are a small sampling of what is needed to ecoBalance a site or a building. It is important to understand in all cases that nature is doing the work for us. For example, forests give us oxygen while also serving as a carbon sink. It seems that we need a major re-evaluation of what is technology and what is nature. We cannot start the planning process with the assumption that we know what technology a culture may or may not relate to, nor whether what we are proposing is politically correct. We cannot afford to say that because the technology is old that it is good, nor vice versa. At this point in the development of any project, we must understand as professionals and as users that we are in the midst of an evolutionary change in human development that must borrow from the best of human experience in general as to what might or might not adapt to a place. The care and management of the natural life support system itself will become an important community enterprise and must be reflected in planning and economics. Therefore, in planning we need to be as clear as possible within any proposed land-to-people (technology) relationship as to the degree of responsibility people will have, and their time commitment to making this relationship work. This human factor is one of the biggest unknowns that must be dealt with in planning.

Page 50

1998 Towards Resource Balanced Land Use Planning (The Emergence of Life Cycle Space) Life Cycle Space, which later became ecoBalance, begins to provide the logic necessary to support the assertion that a region can best be sustained by regionalizing its resource dependencies rather than national and even international life cycle dependencies. The degree of balance within a given spatial context (boundary scale) must relate heavily on our understanding of a broad spectrum of ambient resources. STATE SFTE COY REGION 3 RESOURCE DISTRIBUTE PROCESS TRANSPORT SOURCE srrE source resource CITY CO co LLI UJ O o: O Kt a: 1^ to I TYPEI
when all life cycle stages are geographically separated TYPE2
when sourcing alone occurs on site but all other life cycle steps except “use” are remote Priority should be placed on providing for the incorporation of all possible processes at the smallest possible scale thus relieving the burden of impact necessitated by the sole use of larger life cycle systems. REGION 1 I ii.onoo nnooLi. ■■ no. onnoon o.oono ■■noon ■■■■■■ ■■ non -^YP^^3 ^fi@.; when processing occurs at the source (i.e. portable lumber mill) TYPE4 ■
by combining transport and distribution into a singular regional activity SOURCE SOURCE solar gan hontied rahvviw c^cho, fy # and <vc!er mass togtrol solar en^gy cows steers pgs cT—kerc recycled paper organic vrastes ethanol fud STATE TYPES .■ when processing or manufacturing occur at point of use (i.e. site built roof trusses) TYPE6
when source, transport, process manufacturing occur at point of use (i.e. pressed soil block) pulp processing transport terminal composting g2s heat slurry C02 SUS-bill tokens TYPE7 when all processes occur on site including the reuse of product .(i.e. interlocking pressed soil block) radial heat rad ant cooing O^urndfcalon bolmatc ccm’on wetanj wasteAater treairrent green house algae ponds gas generator peep’e food ariimal focd electricity public transport communrty garden paper manufacturing food tipper RESOURCE RESOURCE RESOURCE Energy and water balancing. Scale, site Output: 60% heat and 70% cool Food and energy balancing. Scale: integrated farming (21 acres) Output: 3666 Ibs/day vegetables; 375 Ibs/day algae; 15360 kwh/day electricity Money and material balancing. Scale: urban (28 sq. miles) Output; 200 trees/week saved; 4000 Ibs/week vegetables Miniaturization of the life cycle within a regional context requires recognition of the life cycle sequence as a fundamental planning tool increase sefficiency. The process within each life cycle overlaps and serves in a multi- functional manner into another life cycle. The efficiency of the life cycle process rises when fewer individual or separate transformations occur.

Page 52

2000 EcoBalance- Susfainab/e Land Use Planning Sustainability is measurable according to the degree to which a balanced holding capacity exists between humans and their land use. Measurement can take two Forms: 1) the ratio between the amount of life support the land supplies vs. the amount of land needed by humans; and 2) the ratio of on-site supplied life support needs vs. off-site (beyond site boundaries) supply. The objective is to establish parameters, or limits, on human activities by carefully managing their resource use, and to share the degree they go beyond these limits to the next scalar boundary beyond the site. MATERIAL TO SrrE RELATIONSHIP ON STTE WATER HARVESIED FROM RAIN AND TREATED ON STTE USING PLANTS PASSIVE SOLAR MATERIALS COME FROM SnE EXCEPT GLASS. AS DO MASSIVE STORAGE MATERIALS ON STTE VEGETATION BOTH CREATES 02 AND ABSORBS C02 EARTH BUILDING MATERIALS ARE MDCED WTTH OFF STTE MATERIALS BUT ARE SHAPH) FOR REUSE FOOD GROWN ON STTE IS REPLENISHED WTTH ORGANIC FEHIILIZER ON STTE SOLAR ELECTRIC MATERIALS COME FROM OFF STTE AS DO APPLIANCE MATBUALS SUSTAINABLY HARVESTED WOOD FROM ON STTE, INCLUDING REUSE OF THESE BLDG MATERIALS S SOURCE FOOTPRINT R RESOURCE FOOTPRIPIT ECOBALANCED MASTER PLAN SYNTHESIS COMPOSnr MAP PRINCIPLES AND PATTERNSLAND USE PROGRAM NATURAL ENVIRONMENT COMPOSTTE PRODUCTIVE LAND COMPOSTTE BUILDING COMPOSnr INFRASTRUCTURE COMPOSITE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SETTLEMENTS CLUSTER PLAN PRESERVATION OPEN SPACE PLAN coMPOsrrE maps AIR WATER FOOD ENERGY HAZARDSECOSYSTEMS AREAS BALANCE DOWN AIR UFE CYCLE AND BALANCE THEMES I surrABiLnY maps 1 -. NATURE PHYSIOGRAPHIC VEGETATIVE HUMAN BASE/INVENTORY LEGAL Sustainable technologies in each of the topic areas is related to the site in terms of the material life cycle. This is a representation of how we incorporate life cycle principles as the basis to identify the physical footprint that represents the energy and/or materials that contribute to these human life support activities. In order to keep these footprints relatively simple, the upstream and downstream of the life cycle are summarized into source and resource.

Page 53

2007 Principles of Icons as a Life Cycle Language for Planning and Interpretive Purposes Establishing, planning and building balance conventions internal to icon properties. SOURCE USE O UJ O a: co co UJ O O a: UJ O a: a: SOURCE USE co co UJ O O 0- 0- UJ O cr O co ill o: SOURCE USE co co UJ O O cr O- A life cycle is defined as the cycle of conversion processes necessary to use and replenish any ambient condition. Life cycle balancing occurs when conversion processes necessary to use and replenish an ambient condition occur within a definable boundary. Life cycle integration occurs when a given conversion process or processes serve multiple life cycle family functions. First level integration occurs when one other family is included, second level integration with two families, etc. LIFE CYCLE FAMILIES MATERIALS ENERGY WATER FOOD AIR AIR WATER FOOD MATERIALSENERGY

Page 54

2009 EcoBalance. A Susfainab/e Land Use Planning and Design Methadalogy During the ecoBalance planning process, space uses are determined and analyzed according to the footprints that are necessary to supply the basic human life support requirements of air, water, food, energy, and materials in a regenerative fashion. The framework for ecoBalance planning remains essentially the same regardless of project scale, with the process typically directed towards the building, site, and master planning scales. The objective during the planning process is to understand the parameters, or limits, on human activities by carefully managing their resource use. In addition, the degree to which limits are exceeded is shared within the next scalar boundary, either on or off the building boundary or site. Measurement of sustainability is an integral part of the planning and design process, and is illustrated in multiple forms, such as 1) the ratio between the amount of life support supplied by the space being analyzed vs. the amount of life support needed by humans occupying that space; 2) The ratio of the sourcing requirements of the physical space vs. the re-sourcing capacity of the same space; 3) the ratio of life support needs supplied on-site vs. those supplied off-site. RE-SOURCEUSE U RD D R P U R SOURCE (S) RE-SOURCE (R) Z SOURCE (S) (AIR.WATER.F00(>.ENERGY+MAroQALS) AIR WATER FOOD ENERGY MATERIALS E RE-SOURCE (R) CAJR.WXTER.FOOD. ENERGY. MATEHIALS) SOURCE USE O The diagrams above represent the ecoBalance systemic which shows how life cycle principles (source, process, use, resource) are derived from the six life cycle stages (resource extraction, transport, processing/manufacturing, distribution, installation, use and maintenance, and reuse, recycling, or disposal) and are classified into two main life cycle activities (source and resource). All these segments of life support systems and life cycle principles can be summarized into a single diagram: the ecoBalance square or ecoBalance circle. to

Z m O X 07 O O O THIRD ORDER FIRST ORDER SECOND ORDER —motfirErerc, : screed —to—ig ^-oe-erg, itorage as a Quaffs r. me totftamg StorPV,rtp&.cedcrthetjdr? Orf and ere’;/corse-.mg ap0.a-r.es =»•mthe oi&ng Ed’tn build.ng n.ale’.ai ace narves ed taddu ano JS-d in die butdng Water harvested from buidmg roof and treated on the lot using ‘.wetlands Food grown onsite is replenished with compost made on lot On site vegetation both creates 02 and absorbs C02 CT LLJ 1 O O O a: LLI Z LU RE-SOURCE O SOURCE W02 SOOO sft W C02 7500 sft til | HARVEST | 400 sft TREATMENT 400 sft HARVEST। 4000 sft _______________ COMPOST 300 sft FV PANEL HARVEST 600 Sft rfy” PV PANEL CONSERVE 300 sft PASSIVE SOLAR HAR’/EST 600 sft —’ PASSNE SOLAR CONSERVE 600 sft ________________ WOOD HARVEST 1 Acre WOOD BUILDING 600 sft I— | EARTH HARVEST 1 600 sft EARTH FLOORS 600 sft To understand the relationship between the footprints of life cycles, a hierarchy of orders is required. Most of these relationships are summarized in the Venn diagrams in above. The objective is to understand the parameters, or limits, on human activity by carefully managing their resource use, and to share the degree they go beyond these limits to the next scalar boundary. The ecoBalance footprint corresponds to the immediate physical land/space that contributes to human life support activities or the capacity of these utilities to work together to perform balancing functions. These life support activities can be given a range of approximate physical dimensions or footprints for both the source and re-source ends of the life cycle to show balancing.

Page 55

BASE/ INVENTORY MAPS SOURCE USE NATURE

• Species Survey
• Habitat Survey VEGETATIVE -Vegetation Density -Vegetation Type
• Aerial Infrared photo PHYSIOGRAPHIC
• Contours
• Hydrology
• Geology -Climate Data HUMAN
• Human Needs Data
• Special Features
• Site improvements SUITABILITY MAPS ECOBALANCE AIR
• Preserved Nature -02 -C02 LEGAL
• Legal Conflicts
• Spatial & Metabolic legalities i WATER i-Water Harvesting -Waste Water | Treatment|

FOOD

• Crop Land -Composting ENERGY Building Capture/ Retention -Infrastructure Utility Use space MATERIAL
• Material Soure -Material Use (Buildings, roads etc.) HAZARDS -Wildfire -Flood -Tornado -Contamination COMPOSITE MAPS AIR MATERIAL I ® 61 WATER

FOOD ENERGY CD (D@ ® @ 0) @ (5) © ® Ei Roots Treat Waste water Edible Pods/ Liquer from beans Produces Oxygen Absorbs C02 Firewood for Fuel Biofuel Source Provides Shade Lumber, Flooring Life support topics are represented by five different colors, life cycle processes by the four sides of a square or four quadrants of a circle, and life cycle technologies are either represented by icons or numbers. Integration is the overlapping or multi- use potential of a single footprint and is based on the knowledge of a set of multiple uses (a mesquite tree can provide fuel, flooring materials, shade, biofuel, and food). NAUTURAL LAND

• Land used to preserve, protect and regenerate Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystems BUILT LAND Land development footprint for buildings and facilities like playfields. PRODUCTIVE LAND
• Land used for sourcing human needs such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries INFRASTRUCTURE LAND
• Footprint of all human inffastruc- tiural activities like transportation water, sewage and power. SYNTHESIS MAPS PRIORITIES PATTERNS PRINCIPLES PROGRAM | ECOBALANCED MASTERPLAN| Part of the purpose of ecoBalance planning is to utilize existing ecological land planning techniques as much as possible. The above places the life cycle balancing framework within a well known sequence of 1) inventory maps, 2) suitability maps, 3) composite maps, 4) synthesis maps and 5) master plan..

Page 56

ASSUMPTIONS: fRESHWATER: ra4&d Io 0001,0 \TO(0IOm k’W’Q told vcA/iw • tool aooWtrenQ f!y*‘Jilmr 600110)0 PROCESS: CMoo)COTxMi, •PCT ooy wu<0v>oo^Nto 100 do,ovetoQO doW4kngin in fo’Oi SALINE WATER: Woi&f Ciwol! O’JOI twi loQt Il7vh Ibjtti, 4 low fbUi we, pfrf r,o<*?n r,oi Oct/, 14/00on! OREYWATER: Wo el com<<lod Wailmd la 1 Colon Orihwolof rA dot h Hfi(maOrraim T UoDih) woiiojwato 01^ ItQO’tnoni — 17)ui BLACKWATER: Wo d coth’JvcloU Woiiond lot 1 Golson CkKiwafor pot day h I,0(rr/,<frnum 7doplh, WfflkvM 01’0wgiof hoOTmont— ,0ill Gfoywolof Wollond 123 10 Ima<2’doolh| WATER SYSTEM DESIGN rod GK aw 117,1 u0aan>jinoy wotfw 1 BOTvoom >fii i6A u:i/Go, IJbaatfdmvu^nzn OJadtii’v urcNCwonran: nui lfTCM^ Qroml ‘Qoa vaQon Ill nd/dov j/orwoicf IZJ QCX/OOy uses: TMengn ^4,4 vie, ira imon p<f Oof. U)weono wo poric/j, Iooorn totyvoooiw;6wet oct pauxi pet Joy, I§ “rood wo portod, 0^ ppm pvMCT! 1 vw fMrf po’K^ pof Ooy, 6ph/lo ihowcr 1,70opn, OjmomK 0Itoh001penal pc do/: 60^006r& cyclo Piniy:037 load,W pffibon $ra Joy, X) oercm p« low! POOI RArmAnx CTIAnUfWAtDt IMM/MaCKOH UViNO COUtCtON 00’01’07 WATtt ,001 OCTO, PM tAUOetPOTANT KITCMCN UTMOOM WATEI IHOWW 1000 SOW WATEt DCMWAlKLI 04MWAKt WATp HLAtU PNC CICGT BATHTUI OMOCN MCAttR IWtO/VV WATU low lPUtA!04 teWM^ CGTUN DITUATON -— - process”— G’CWYAIU CONSntVCIED BLACKWATER WCTLAND WOLAND TRCATMEM lYSTEM — FRDHWATLR •SALINE WATER — OROTWATER .”BLACKWATER USE RE-SOURCE FLOWS An integrated system design approach is needed for maximizing the potential of the building to balance as many life support needs as possible within its boundary. It also helps to identify multiple uses of various components. For example, a fruit tree represents all three life support topics and is a source of biomass and shade, can be irrigated by wastewater, nurtured by compost and provides fruits. For simplicity’s sake, the building components which represent more than one life support topic have been colored according to their major topic. Integrated system design demonstrates the synergy between the natural and built environments and how both are required to complete the four life cycle processes.

Page 57

ASSUMPTIONS: ELECTRICITY: pv Solo, ifllomt WmdSntom: Relrigcoio,: LED UQhh: Ce£ng Ton:Inducikm Stove’ Ovon/Mlc’owove: Tanhleii WoW Healer. Dishwaihec Womc: miHNdCT, lolCT todclion I2,etfldency 30m2 of ponei tOToceaeo I1mphaveroge wtod ipeed 4.lm c^omole, w<r4 gonoraloo 2 Irld7„at outer temperoturo o’ 72 dog. 4.13W. 4.7W. 44W txTOi. QJ fvrritng 0 tn/do, 4256W tom running I2 hn eoch do, (•tOOGW iloveioo running I hour ooch do, I Own running 04 hn/doy 2 heolen. ooch running IS mjVda, I ddhwoiher.3l2kWh/,eCT I Wother. 100 kWN,GOT THERMAL ENERGY- Solar water Heater Sctar CoOectc oreo tor I ponon l i1015ttt Hot Woler Stcroge tank capodt/tor I penon b 10-30 GoJcn, System provtae 50&X of o houtehokfi hot water needs (leu In winter, mere h summer), Average household uses 3) mi ion BTU ot Tnonr.d Energy per year ( 500.000 tbs. water heeled to ICO degrees F) WASTE HEAT; Dranwoter Heal Pocovor, syslem tecopturo 4040 percent heat BIOMASS: Mogotioro ricntoibn on lO.COO tfl (0.25 oere| Otomas s of Megaflora is 28 dr, Tons per acre (4560 ift) per yea occord-ng to Megahcro Corp. 1 ion Glomou produces ?.96t rr.Xon Otu of Energy 1 Ton Biomass (2000 Its) rxoduce 400 IPs of tlechor tr, weight ENERGY SYSTEM DESIGN WIND ENERGY SOLAR PV SOLAR WATER TREE-SHADE, PASNESOLAR SYSTEM SYSTEM HEATER BIOMASS SYSTEMS OC/AC SUN FROST nEX/UEL ENERGY STAR LAUNDRY MOOWAVE INSTANT D&MUMnRR LED CEUNNO WATER CONVUTTOR REFR;GERAT0R STOVE 05KWA5MER OShWASHER OVEN WATER HEATER ICESATTUY UGMTSFAN PUMPS SOURCE PROCESS USE z l---------------------oxcniCTr THttMAL ENERGY© © L\ = 1— ^/’ I ---------------------WASTSMAT MEAT to NATURAL UViNG POOL PASIVE SOLAR ICE BATTERY WATEREXCHANOER CHAR UGHT SWIMMING SYSTEMS CONDENSATE — R—OURCE — flows ASSUMPTIONS:

• Vegetable Gordon (or I person: 400 sit (Bated on 2000 Uoco’orlei do>, vegoiartan detlequroment & lorgeit oreo monogoble Py one penon in tpero tme) CO it, ot vegeioblo garden yields 210 ici vegotoblei)
• Aquaculture pond for 1 person: I50 sft (Baled on 3400 g per yoCT protein requYemnet, o poncn con get from fah)
• Food Scrap Composting Requirement of 1 person: 9 cubic feet(Baled on mhmum recommendeo Ue of I cu&cyard (3’ x 3’X3’) comooiter for , howohold) FOOD SYSTEM DESIGN
• Yard Waste Composting Requirement: 27 cubic feet per Ton( 5000 itt og yard generate, I Ton yord woite) -Compost Generated In a Composting Toilet by I person: 88 lbs per year 2400ift VOTtoe Otyoan 900 Ut AQuoevtura pond FRUIT FOOD AQUA. UvoO POOlSUN FROST Fl£X#UElMCTOWAVEQiNKO TABLE, COM^STINO COMPCSTNO TREE CARDIN PONCS WOLANOS RURGERATOR STOVE OVEN EATWO TOUT PU SOURCE PROCESS USE RE.SOURCE FLOWS

Page 58

2009 The EcoBalance Approach to Transect-Based Planning By building upon the Transect approach of New Urbanism (in which elements of the built environment are categorized from rural to urban) and assessing the performance requirements within each transect, we enable the entire community (from household to, eventually, an entire campus) to benefit from a replenished resource future. EcoBalance planning and design is rooted in the life cycle — where things come from and where they go — so that the sourcing and re-sourcing process occurs within a spatial context that is manageable either by the individual or the community. Additionally, ecoBalance planning considers industrial processes as inextricable from truly holistic performance assessments. Life support cycles occur at many scales, from the backyard to the village or campus, and they occur as part of almost all life as we know it: from air, water, food, and energy cycles to the building materials we use. SOURCE SOURCE 4 Life Cycle Balancing refers to the actual process or physical accounting of both the sourcing from and resourcing to land areas necessary to support each life support system. The Life Cycle technologies are represented by either icons or numbers respectively. Development Semi Balance at Transect level Deficit Balance at ^O-industrial Development Complete Balance at Community Level One of the more important aspects of ecoBalance planning is the inclusion of an eco-industrial development as a means of overall resource balancing. Industry can no longer be thought of as a necessary evil in the sustainable planning of communities. Instead, it must be considered an integral part of it (using the opportunity to integrate industry as a revenue generating employment and as a final step in resource balancing the entire community). The eco-industrial development is an adjunct space in a community that houses highly efficient eco-industrial technologies that contribute to the overall balance of the community. The collection of these highly efficient processes results in a magnifying effect that compensates and, at times, surpasses deficits of the transects.

Page 59

New Urbanism Transect Zones lira life Cycle Balance Integrated Approach V,\RI,\BLES Mt IVoftr Food Energy Materials ECOULUia WITH ojun rot n Smart Code Best Management Practices BMP CODE BEST PR.\CTICES SVST.\L.\BLE BUSINESS CODE Life Cycle Balance Single Variable Approach T3 Verano Master Plan Transect Map

iR^-]feiii^i^ Like many other procedures, the SmartCode simply lists criteria to be implemented instead of conceiving of the list as actually providing for a cycle of activities that help resource balancing. An ecoBalanced SmartCode, on the other hand, shares the basic provision of demonstrating and providing for the full life cycle accountability of a variety of human life-support flows. The addition of the word “ecoBalance” establishes the essential constituent of matching need with replenishment and total or partial cycle completion. The addition of ecoBalance to SmartCode accomplishes the following: 1) completes cycles and adds the necessary steps to the existing SmartCode list to complete life cycles; 2) integrates one cycle with another; 3) realizes economic opportunities in which many critical activities are potential sustainable businesses fitting three economic roles: production, sales, or maintenance revealing the economic opportunities that this type of program offers within the community and/or region versus procedures that are simply not conscious of this aspect.

Page 60

2008 FUNDING: The Kendeda Fund PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Lovleen Gill-Aulakh Making the invisible visible is one of the Centers long-standing principles. VisibleGreen is a program enabled through the two-dimensional QR (quick response) code technology that enables detailed information to be accessed through a cell phone application. The data “tell the life cycle story” of how and why something is green—such as its CO2 or water footprint. Three VisibleGreen scales are envisioned: person, home, city. They share a life cycle coding using different metrics for analysis. At the “person” scale, the carbon footprint is based on where money is spent, using a program such as Mint.com and converting money to carbon footprint equivalent. The procedure draws on comparative behavior incentives, comparing an individual’s footprint to others in the neighborhood, city or country. At the “home” scale, life cycle events are tagged enabling one to compare performance within a life cycle framework to others. And, at the “city” scale, the codes reveal where and how green products are manufactured, sold and used, based on the life cycle categories of air, water, food, energy and materials. As QR codes become more prevalent in the U.S., this approach offers a powerful entry point in sharing key performance information to the broad public. VISIBLEGREEN™

Page 61

VisibleGreen (2008) Sustainability in its essence is understanding how to live within limits. To some degree all of us have had to accomplish this but in minor ways that have not effected our very life style and everyday habits. To gain this understanding, there need to be examples, peers, and a metric that establish a baseline that is so fundamental that it is imperative that one must act. Together, these actions establish the culture of sustainability in a manner that is both replicable and transformative. Transformation of society requires buy-in at all levels of income, education, and life style; it requires a sense of belonging to something much larger than the self into a condition of shared experiences that are deeply meaningful to the point of becoming a part of habit, both conscious and unconscious. The enabling procedures and technologies outlined are multifaceted in a way in which understanding can occur through combinations of peer-to-peer and experiential means. The proposal starts simply and touches the art and science within us all using a most important human trait, that of the competitive spirit, to be the best we can be with the most basic of all human instincts - survival. It is simple because it is strategic in how the mind infection unfolds with least effort and resources. It uses the delight of using spare time to understand how we as a family or as a business are doing related to everyday cost compared to others in our town, region, or state. How does our monthly or yearly cost of life compare to others in our town or our region; what does it take to become green in five life cycle areas and how are we contributing to our use of air (how much carbon we produce), our water and waste water, food, energy, materials, communication, and transportation. We are developing a means that incorporates a comparative basis of “life style” with solutions within our communities through both examples and businesses that cater to the need for reducing costs to ourselves and our community, as well as to the ecosystems upon which we depend, by means of establishing a green sustainable enterprise network. The revenue model is established by the richness of the network where information about sustainable enterprises gradually replaces monetary flow. It also admits to the fact that by connecting direct monetary savings and experiential information, a fortune can be gleaned to those who “capture” what is called the green meme.

Page 62

2008 VisibleGreen VisibleGreen is an open source framework to evolve the culture of sustainability from one of self gratification to one of a movement. This requires many entry points, from using the entire city region and its experiences to the ability to recognize many types of actors (who might not even realize that they are actors) and who themselves become identifiers and recognizers of more movement players. To do this there must be an establishment of a framework that has the depth and breadth attributes for identifying players of all types. 2008 TO: mar SOURCE communi consumpti -2006 -2007 2009 -2010 August 2008 group A group 6 group C group 0 group C group f H sep oct I- nov — dec -2009 -2010 —2006 ^2007 1-1200^ !=jan ; i- feb I i-mar :Hapr I H may !jun :Ljui । —(dual world nation _ Idiwun * UAE| : Uk City ‘Atld-nta 61 Bjltinore ChlCdcjo xl community East -i • Northwest’ < West - v group ; groupA ; group B j group C . group 0 X’ individual :GV -1 : PFt person group facility city world individual EcoBalance master chart group EcoBalance member comparison SOURCE RE-SOURCE with respective implementations with respective role in group efficiencies facility EcoBalance competing group analysis multi-facility city EcoBalance selective Implementation diagram SOURCE RE-SOURCE facilities N. E. 5. and W with respective employment of general EcoBalance strategies personal water efficiency ratings comparison group energy cycle elaboration and comparison facility food cycle comparison world EcoBalance by proportional city achievement AT DC LA NY SO SF SF SO IIY LA DC AT SF SO NY LA DC AT AT DC LA NY SO SF cities AT. DC. LA. NY, SO. and SF with respective proportional phase engagement C4p4:‘t, source on-site 7G% off-site 24% process continued 68% lost 32% use productive 491 waste 19% resource reuse 66% SOURCE City-based facility groups air cycle rating world community of facilities material cycle development bir t/pcs: • sufficlert 02, heaUhy C02 level, nfniral pollutants • Cefte’ert 02, unheeltn, COZ level, excessive pollutants proportional tjle’ce tetweer ♦/- is retaphor of air quality source on-site 50% off-site 50% process continued 81% lost 19% use productive 71% waste 10% resource reuse 39% group precess 1 etect’i ? Kat use 1 UJt’eti •OURCE source SIX 191 process loot OS use 64% 361 resource 1001 OS source 41% 691 precess 69$ 111 use ;7S ?31 resource 011 161 2012 r SOURCE 1% RE-SOURCE process 1 conpost 2 biofuel 3 poles 4 beams S boards 2009 1 SOURCE b, RE SOURCE resource 1 new growth 2 landscape 3 deconstr. 4 recon,Ig. source 1 biofuel 2 banboo 3 cegafiora use 1 fertilizer 2 energy 3 landscape 4 arcatures 5 bulIdIng

Page 63

VISIBLE PERSON™ VISIBLE VISIBLE COMMUNITYTM 0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 MONEY SPENT BY ONE INDIVIDUAL PER YEAR ENERGY HEALTH HOUSE OTHER WATER visibleCommunity Through the predominance of the cell phone, we have been able to incorporate the OR code as a means of linking the cell phone to the best green practices of urban life and the city as a whole. The system is based on the ability to incorporate a downloadable program that enables the phone to “read” a matrix-type code that is accessible on any object throughout the city. visibleHome / visibleBusiness Sensors or monitors are placed in carefully chosen locations in the home so that the home/business environment can be analyzed from a sustainable systems standpoint. Secondly, a calculator enables the user to size and price new sustainable system alternatives and compare them to existing. Key functions are then communicated to alter habits through a variety of embedded intelligence sensors that act as informants over time. visiblePerson The visiblePerson is an analysis tool that enables an individual/family to understand what areas of their finances can be improved financially and environmentally. The tool uses peer to peer procedures to compare the individual/family to their own neighborhood, city, or state. The individual’s ability to take action through possible improvements are linked into a series of vendors/products that are able to solve that particular condition.

Page 64

2008 FUNDING: The Kendeda Fund PROJECT TEAM: Sam Brunswick, Charlie Candler; Youngjae Chung; Cassidy Ellis; Pliny Fisk III; Ariel Fisk-Vittori; Janis Fowler; Lovleen Gill-Aulakh; Sebasti|ian Jemec; Lauren Jones; Jesse Miller; Aaron Smith, Brady Zaitoon ProtoScope is a worldwide scoping procedure that provides essential perspective related to the unique significance of any place on Earth, relative to its biophysical uniqueness and its pattern of similarities to other protoSpaces. Patterns of conditions are explored, from world to province to country to ecozone to site, to understand both the uniqueness of place and the problems associated with how biophysical issues are worsening or improving as you approach a particular site location. Global partners are identified who have experience in working in five life support areas (energy, water, air, food, materials) overlaid into zones of similar ecological, hydrological, climatic and soil geology conditions. What results are a series of protoCodes that express conducts and actions that need to be taken. Two Texas city/regions — Galveston and EI Paso — have been investigated through this lens. Design and planning actions are proposed by understanding the salient issues and potentials of each place based on the findings of this method. Solution sets can be incorporated into QR code combined cell phone messaging for social networking or learning network purposes experiential board games and linked to virtual gaming. Together, these processes help to change whole paradigms within at risk communities. The wealth of human ingenuity that can be brought to bear at the global and local scales on any problem is infinite. PROTOSCOPE™

Page 65

Ecology of Place: Creating a ProtoCity for the Southwestern United States (2009) Any type oF development benefits from understanding where you are coming from in terms of trends and where you are trying to go in terms of best practices. ProtoScope provides the basis for triggering a city/region to move to the next stage of the Development Ladder by creating the capacity to create the context for change. It may be introduced at any stage of the Development Ladder, and is appropriate for any community on the edge of change. ProtoScope entails three phases. The first phase, information gathering, consists of protoMetrics, protoSpace, and protoPartners. ProtoMetrics provides a location-specific assessment incorporating a globally oriented biophysical pattern finding procedure. ProtoSpace locates similar biophysical zones. ProtoPartners identifies organizations in protoSpaces that have relevant information to share. During phase two, assessment and learning, flow indicators are established which are derived from assessing the local metabolism in light of environmental patterns and human experience. The position on the development ladder is established along with the location of the physical and digital protoSite (or a place to prototype some or all of the solution sets). The third phase, implementation, begins with establishing a tool kit for intervention according to the flow indicators. EcoBalance procedures are identified at several scales (the home, neighborhood, and regional) Strategic local partners are oriented around indicators and set up immersive and interactive simulation experiences, from experimental gaming (informal) to demonstrations with focus groups (formal). After financing is created, performed or acquired, assessment and replication take place.

Page 66

2009 WATER SOURCES CLIMATOLOGYECOSYSTEM HEALTH Q O 0000^ !^0000 ^13 O ©loot JUi/IJUOZ Q m O I. n^^nnn I^z SOIL/MINERALS C OOIII ItlN lEOOL lUUUU to a^ 1 U. 00^01 HOT B; Ki10 U TRENDS: BIODIVERSnY INDEX ie:, [[BOI TREND-S: WATER QUALITY lORr .Enno V) Itoi J[[EI TRENDS: CLIMATE CHANGE 10^1 10011 Sh\BW] OOflOD TRENDS: EROSION roEn ProtoMetrics are the characteristics of a place, based on the biophysical scalar patterns, identified through trends from world to city/site. ProtoMetric utilizes online databases covering Ecology, Hydrology, Climate and Geology/soils

Page 67

ECOSYSTEM HEALTH WATER RESOURCES CUMATOLOGY SOIL/ MINERALS GALVESTON PROTOCITIES _ Citv/Territorv Galveston, Texas USA___________________ 31oGooRraphlc Zone Biome EcoRoglon UOd’CtlC ________________________________- - rropUU and Subtropical Grasslands, Savannas, and Si’rvhlcxnds Tropical and Subtropical Grasslands, Savannas, and me. Shrublands… - Tropical and Subtropical Gratdandi. SMawiaa and Shrublands Latitude Elevation

opulotton/Ocnsity 29.IG„ 27.78S ,„.—.-…*#-„!.>:,-M>„..—;,=—-4G:>.=**re= Average Summer 66-84 ______________________________________________ -I Average Winter 42.74 Annual Rainfall Animal Species 5A:7V migrant and native grassland birds. Also bats, mice, armadillos and othermammals, large mammals, many mtgranQuite diverse In mammals, reptiles, amphlblan,s birds, and nvertebrates Plant Species High grass abundance, thorny bushes, shrubs, and cacti with Immense dlterslty: rainforests ProtoSpcice is the identity of all locations across the globe with statistically similar ProtoMetric characteristics. ProtoSpace forms the basis for a global learning and organizing network linked by similar experience and expertise. REFERENCES; C:=0cd Imsecrby Paul Ibw+m nWMrw eenhsr, ILDES-Latin-American Institute for Etologtal& Surtatnablo Dtttlopmant/ YACU YURA and Surtalna Wiley. Sustahabiliry. Religious and Spimual loon SuiuinaWe Living, SuiWnable Communitei Environment and health, management of waw rcourtn air quai^ The ProtoPartner work-net is a network of individuals, organizations, and other bodies working in the five ecoBalance impact categories (air, water, food, energy, materials) with the same essential biophysical conditions.

Page 68

H IVPERIODIC TABLE VI VII B^ €1 Ar (GaZn( .pe, >As KrNi JSejMl^vK< XGNbSr Pt >Au Pb^ Bi PqiHj At RnHf> <Ta W Re’ Ba^ <F® FlUORN^ Ineon Ira^ggl 2 3 Source: PERMACULTURE- A Designer’s Manual by Bill Mollison MAJOR ELEMENTS of which soil Is composed MAJOR NUTRIENTS in plant tissues & soils MAJOR ELEMENTS necessary to metabolic function in animals POISONS radioactive isotopes taken up by plants & animals TRACE ELEMENTS necessary to metabolic functions in plants TRACE ELEMENTS necessary to metabolic functions in animals POISONS metabolic poisons, dangerous to life forms ELEMENTS occuring in minute quantities in plants & marine & freshwater algae CATALYTIC ELEMENTS Involved in metabolic function & hydrocarbon balancing ELEMENTS critical or limiting to phytoplankton, aquatic organisms ELEMENTS specifically concenterated by bacterial action, root association of plants, anaerobic bacteria HYDRO NON- ALKALI INCRT MAJOR RARE RADO- CARBONS METALS METALS CASES CATALYST EARTHS ACTIVE PLANTS/SOIL K^O©@^ Ca, Fe, AI, Si, H, Na, Mg, K, Ca, C, N, O, P, S, Mo, Mn, Zn, B, Ti, V, Ru, Rh, Os, Ir, Pd, Pt, Co, Ni, Cu, Cd, Hg HUMANS/ ANIMALS ^^ Ca, H, U, Na, K, Mg, V, Cr, Mo, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, C, Si, Sn, N, P, As, 0, S, Se, F, CI, I AQUATIC LIFE O O Li, Mg, Ca, Sr, La,Tl, V, Ta, Cr, W, Os, Co, Ir, Pt, Au, Cd, Hg, AI, Ga, In, Si, Sn, Pb, N, P, As, Sb, Bi, S, F, CI, Br, I, H, Na, K, Mo, Mn, Fe, Cu, Zn, B, C, 0, Se MICRO ORGANISMS O H, Na, K, Mg, Ca, V, Mo, Mn, Fe, Co, Cu, Zn, B, C, Si, N, P, 0, S, Se, F, CI, Br, I, Mn, Ni, Cd, Hg POISONOUS MINERALS ^O Cs, Fr, Sr, Ra, Ac,Th, Pa, U, Np, Pu, Am, Co, Po, I, At, Rn, Na, Be,17, Zr, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, Hg, B, Al, Sn, Pb, N, As, S, Se, F, CI, Br MgO Cement (tons) Portland Cement offset CO2 World Offset Mg ==>445 million => | 17^286 1 =>| 0.89%| CIty State Country World Galveston Texas USA Water Tfeatment{R0) Mg N (Tons) 0.09 0.12 (Tons) 38 49 (Tons) 486 626 (Tons) Desalination Mg N K P 2,303,610 27,500 700,012 157 19,196,752 229,170 5,833,431 1309 011/Gas Wells Mg N 10,954 14,123 36,513 474)77 82,985 106,992 Total In Tons Qty State Country World Mg 0322 10,992 2340,609 19,279,737 N 0.416 14172 75,203 336,162 K 700,012 5,833,431 P 157 1,309 N => 336162N K => 4841747 K2O P = > 606 P2O5

• Bio Char
• Bio Char
• Bio Char Fertilizer Fertilizer Fertilizer

Page 69

CARBON OFFSET BY ECOSYSTEM 30 O PlantC ■ SdlC 120 30 60 90 Wt„Arahor « d. 1990 O Wetlands Sequester on average 64% more carbon than cultivated land and 94% more carbon than urbanized areas. Reestablishment of a wetland ecosystem along 367 miles of Texas Coastline would sequester 3.4 million tonnes of carbon per year, an average offset of 02% of annual US emissions Rcl ri GULF COAST FRAiniES AND AURSHES CROSS TIMBERS AND FRAIRES ‘011^ A ProtoSite is a neutral location where public, private or non-profit groups can digitally and/or physically prototype solution sets supported by an array of computer simulations, models, web gaming and physical construction. Digital methods can range from basic climatic simulation on the building scale that prototypes performance before construction, to more complex planning procedures to see how the viral evolution of a particular set of intervention strategies effects on the ground conditions. ProtoSite is an intervention laboratory to test ideas.

Page 70

OW W(^W>]^@I^I?§^J Wl Ggj©4m^Y^/MV]^W0^W 0^ ^Wl.i^l@B^^tl ^!aiL@(^m(^W TJ^ A%Y^®(MTOm©)m @I^§@Q!I^. WJ^ w /AW@^mofemra^ {^^)TO.11X1^iwurroww$. Dm W$@^II^1j@!MOmW!^OQ^y^^ 1997 NUTS AND BOLTS OF GREENING TEXAS PUBLIC BUILDINGS 2001 SEATTLE SALMON-FRIENDLY BUILDING GUIDELINES W©^ G^IOlNi WllXI(^GO^W©A^ WASHINGTON, DC HOUSING AUTHORITY 2^ @^@IW!>WriW/M¥yi^ 2^ M^W9@^yi§iMfl^W@1^^^ 2010 GREEN ROOF ADVISORY GROUP

Page 71

BLOCK 21 QR CODE ‘°OOOOO°° ECOBALANCE 0 GREENFORMS CRYSTAL CITY OOOOOOo, OOUOo, Goooooo PROTOCOLS 0000000 im[©xii?iWAiwi, !^^@@ty’©^@(^ PROTOTYPES UT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER LAREDO DEMO. FARM MISSISSIPPI GROHOME HOUSING FOR SIOUX NATION MOROCCO ECO CITY SEATTLE JUSTICE CENTER SEATTLE SALMON FRIENDLY BUILDING BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES CARRIZO SPRINGS VISIBLE GREEN EAST TEXAS PROJECT ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE ECOSPORTS COMPLEX PUERTO CABEZAS PROTO SCOPE AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER DEMO. HOME BASELINE GREEN GREEN BALANCE EL PASO GREEN CITY LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK M©J(|t^l @1I?I^^I I^11©(^ HOUSING FOR NAVAJO NATION SOLAR DECATHLON TEXAS A&M SOLAR DECATHLON HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH ESCARPMENT VILLAGE GALVESTON REDEV. LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE COMMUNITY SUPPORTED ARCH. A&E GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS ‘o ANT /MWUI^^ GREENING THE PENTAGON TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE ECOBALANCE GAME VM^IWINl© DELL CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL mw^(@ % 6y4§lWo)c OWaW/ / i©@^ °Q oGW^l© omW/^l^I?0 AREA POINT NETWORK C? /m °C 0 l^?TKc®tW?^I oi^Wnr( %©@®O(!(^ oC l^l^NV, i;4^@vfi<c|2 &M@;{0 iW@@ir LEED™ RES. NEW DEV. COMM. ’ W/^W 0 )OOOOO(

Page 72

1977 CLIENT: Andy Sansom at the University of Houston FUNDING: University of Houston PROJECT TEAM: Daria Bolton Fisk; Pliny Fisk III Inspired by the ready accessibility of information from maps, the Appropriate Technology Working Atlas for the State of Texas was structured to connect people to the resources, people, and communication networks to put appropriate technologies to work. Funded by a grant from the University of Houston, the Atlas created a shareable document that represented a snapshot of information known at that time, with the potential to be updated as knowledge expanded. As a graphic representation of the Center s seminal area point network planning tool (see Protocols), the Atlas also made visible that place matters—with the State of Texas spanning ten ecoregions, vastly different climate zones and precipitation patterns, what is appropriate in one part of the state may not be appropriate for another. The Atlas is a prototype replicable by other states or jurisdictions. THE WORKING ATLAS

Page 73

An Appropriate Technology Working Atlas for the State of Texas (1977) The Atlas has been developed in response to a number of pressures and perceptions resulting from the world s continuing ecological and energy crisis. The acute pressure of increasingly higher costs and diminishing resource supplies, most apparently energy, has prompted widespread concern. It is, in fact, only a symptom of a far more difficult problem than merely the balancing of resource supply and demand. This problem, the squandering and misuse of natural resources, is in turn a result of a basic perceptual error which dominates “modern” man’s relation to nature. The elaborate technologies which generations of people have developed have created a predominant perception of man’s independence from and dominance over the environment. This blindness to the interdependence of man and nature can only lead to disaster. The purpose of the Atlas is, on a small scale, to re-acquaint people with the capabilities and limitations of their surroundings. It describes and encourages the use of systems which work with nature rather than in opposition to it. The Atlas is not intended merely as a compilation of techniques, but also an introduction to a particular approach to resource usage. The result of this collaboration is microenvironments which satisfy the needs of man and respect the limitations of their particular ecosystems. It also encourages a decentralization of control over the building process and perhaps, in time, the independence and self-sufficiency of individuals within our society. The Atlas is structured in an attempt to achieve these rather lofty goals. Regional resources, such as geologic building materials, water.supply resources and climatic factors are mapped on a statewide, basis in order that a person may determine roughly what resources are locally available for use, and what environmental factors must be contended with or may be harnessed. In order that a person may use these regional resources effectively, schematic descriptive and instructional material is included on ways in which they can be incorporated into building systems as structural components, passive micro-climatic systems, and means of providing for physiological needs. This information, however, in its brevity can not explain the processes and systems sufficiently enough so as to allow their fully informed use. To fill this information gap, two strategies have been developed First, in addition to regional resources, point resources are mapped. Point resources are individuals, firms, or institutions which supply a particular resource or can provide information and resource utilization in the form of skills, first hand experience or written information. Point resources may also be working examples of ways in which resources can be of service to man. In addition to point resources, bibliographic data and a centralized reference source are also incorporated into the Atlas. The bibliographic references draw on the extensive technical literature which has developed over the years. They are provided so that individuals may obtain information about specific areas of interest. People who use the Atlas will, through their efforts, become point resources themselves and foster participation by other individuals. We are proposing to transform and revolutionize man’s relationship to the world around him and, as with any successful revolution, the institution which fostered it should fade away or take on different responsibilities. The success of this revolution (or reformation) is dependent on individuals. Decentralization cannot be accomplished by a central source. People must become personally involved in the process of resource conservation and encourage its use by others.

Page 74

HIGH QUALTTY ADOBEn SOIL ABUNDANT LOW QUALITY ADOBE n SOIL: SCARCE STRUCTURES • UBJOUTTOUS INFORMATION O WUCS POT. AUSTIN it SCOG»HS. AUSTN D SMITH AUSTIN !■■■■■ Adobe Adobe is the most widely used type of earth building. The word adobe is thought to come from the Arab word atob. The work and the process were brought to Europe by the Moors when they conquered Spain and then to the Americas by Spanish conquerors and missionaries. A combination of the technique and style of both Spanish adobe and Native American architecture has evolved into adobe construction as we know it today. Adobe construction is a simple process whose basic elements are soil, fibrous materials, water, and sun. Because adobe is little more than dried mud, it is most suitable for use in regions with limited rainfall (less than 25” per year). An applied piaster or waterproofing coat can be added to adobe walls to prevent erosion by water. In addition, cement, lime, petroleum stabilizers, and horse and cow manure can be added during the block-making process to decrease permeability and thus make adobe more suitable for less arid regions. A wide variety of Texas soils can be used effectively in adobe block. The primary requirements for stable block is a non-alkaline soil with a moderate clay content between twenty and fifty percent The relative clay-sand composition of a soil can be determined by placing a sample in a jar with water, shaking it and allowing it to settle. Measuring the thickness of the sand layer on the bottom, and the superimposed clay layer gives a reasonable approximation of soil composition The water in the jar is tested with litmus paper to ensure that the soil is not strongly alkaline. Test blocks must be made. Blocks which shrink and crack excessively indicate either that too much water was used in making the block, or that the soil used has an unacceptably high clay content. Adobe mix is traditionally prepared directly in the soil from which the block is made. An area of soil is broken up to which water is added and allowed to set in order to assure even moistness of the soil. Fibrous material such as straw is strewn on top of the soil. About one pound of fiber is used for every fifty pounds of soil. Stabilizers in solution with water can also be added. The mix is then mixed by foot. Shovels, hoes, roto-tillers, and tractor drawn harrows are more suitable mixing techniques today. The adobe mix can also be made in a concrete mixer or other suitable mechanical agitator. In any case, it must be thoroughly mixed. Adobe is puddle formed in multiple forms. (Standard adobe blocks are 18” x 12” x 4” or 24” x 18” x 6”.) These multiple forms are placed directly on the ground or on sheets of plastic. The adobe mixture is placed in the mold, tamped, smoothed, and the forms are removed. The blocks are shaded for two or three days to prevent uneven drying and then are stacked on edge to facilitate drying. The blocks are protected from rain and allowed to cure for three to four weeks. Reliable adobe structures must have firm foundations, due to the great mass of the walls, and must be situated on a site which is safe from flooding. Dried blocks are laid in a mud mortar. The walls should be at least ten inches thick and exterior bearing walls should be no thinner than one tenth the height of the wall. Care must be taken to break joints between courses, and to further ensure the integrity of the walls, a continuous concrete bond beam is poured above the final course. The walls are then plastered or treated with a waterproofing agent, and the roof is put on. With care in construction and minimal maintenance, adobe structures can last for centuries.

Page 75

CALICHE: r-1 CHALK BEDROCK L^ CALICHE: fa HIGHLY CALCAREOUS ^-^ CALICHE: F^i SLIGHTLY CALCAREOUS l=J EXTRACTORS • DIEL JACKE. BAILEY COUNTY LONE STAR CEI3ENT, CALHOUN PARKER BROS. & CO.. CALHOUN C(L\nN TERREL. CHILDRESS COMMERICAL PAVERS, LUBBOCK KERR CONST. CO., LUOBOCK CILVIN TERREL. MIDLAND J. LEE MILLIGAN. POTTER INFORMATION <> MAX’S POT, AUSTIN TEXAS ADA. BRYAN STRUCTURES • LAKE CORPUS CHRISTO STATE PARK. MATHIS MAX’S POT. AUSTIN SOUTH,ZEST CRAFTS CENTER. SAN ANTONIO TEXAS ASM. BRYAN Mixing Puddle Molding Soil <Map. Caliche Throughout Texas, farmers, gardeners, and ditch diggers find occasion to curse caliche. This amorphous porous geologic material consisting primarily of calcium carbonate with varying amounts of sand, clay, gravel and other materials covers much of the state, and appears and shovels like a tough clay. It is particularly abundant in arid and semi-arid regions, such as West Texas. Caliche has been used for hundreds of years as a construction material, both as a construction material, both as chinking in wood structures and as a masonry material. The calcium carbonate content of caliche allows affective stabilization to create strong structural material. The first chapel of the Ursuline Academy in San Antonio (now the Southwestern Crafts Center) has rammed earth walls of caliche and is the largest caliche building in the state. Numerous caliche buildings dot the state and are of ten inconspicuous farm buildings. County cultural agents are often aware of their presence. Today, caliche is used primarily as a road bed building material. For this reason, it is a relatively inexpensive earth material. The first step in building with caliche is locating a sufficient quantity of the raw material. Geologic and soil maps aid this search. If a suitable caliche deposit is not found on site, caliche should be tested for its suitability for construction purposes. Soil testing can be rather involved but can be done by most laymen. When suitable caliche is located, test blocks are made with varying ratios of caliche, sand, cement, and water to determine a suitable calcrete mixture for a particular purpose. The mix will vary depending on the caliche, the structural demands which will be made on the calcrete, and the forming technique. These methods follow.

1. Puddle Molding: Calcrete mix is placed in wooden molds and tamped into each mold, the top of the blocks levelled, and the mold removed. The blocks are then allowed to cure for about a month before use. They should be shaded and kept moist for the first three or four days to insure uniform drying.
2. Rammed Earth: A low water, low cement calcrete mix is shovelled into formwork and compacted with a blunt instrument. Movable formwork can be used to minimize wood cost.
3. Cinva Ram: This simple mechanical device produces blocks under 40,000 pounds of pressure with only seventy pounds of applied pressure. Exceptionally strong blocks of various configurations and compositions can be made with this ram.
4. Zed Tiles: Burlap is stretched across a rectangular frame. Calcrete is poured into the form and smoothed. The form is lifted off the ground and placed on blocks allowing the burlap to sag in the center. In a couple of days, when the calcrete is relatively strong, the tile is removed from the form and a domical tile with greater bearing capacity then a flat tile is formed.
5. Earth Forming: Sand or earth is piled into a desired form. Reinforcing is placed over it, and calcrete is poured and spread over the reinforcing. After curving, the panel is lifted into position, or the sand is excavated from underneath. Large complex shells can be made in this way.
6. Poured in Place Pipe: A trench and a layer of calcrete is dug and a layer of calcrete poured. Cylindrical water bags are placed linearly along the center. A layer of calcrete is poured and set, the bags are popped and removed, leaving a continuous pipe.

Page 76

GYPSUM AND fl ANHYDRfTE STRATA — CONTAINING SULPHUR REGION OF SACT DOMES INFORMATION <> MAX’S POT.AUSTIN SW R^EARCH thSI, SAN ANTONIO QTEXAS Alli BRYAN MATERIAL AMOCO PROOUCTION SHELL 01 CTTCO OX PHILIPS PETROLEUM GCTTrOL WARFBI PETROLEUM TEXAS GULF AJLANTCRCHFELD Spraying TAU: Bonding ithe Plrct Icourse/— Painting Stacked, Block with Sulphur] laying of the First Course Weighing/ the Ingredients ^< Spraying ’------/ ”“Stacked Block with Bonding Material Cloth with > -Sulphur Sulphur Sulphur is perhaps the most promising, yet least utilized building material in Texas. Huge areas of the state are underlain with sulphur deposited in gypsum beds or in salt domes. These sulphur deposits are mined by forcing super-heated steam into sulphur bearing strata. Sulphur is also a by-product of petroleum and natural gas refining. Texas has vast quantities of sulphur available, and in today’s market it is relatively cheap. Sulphur has many properties which make it suitable for use in construction. It is strong, durable, waterproof, insulating, hygienic, vermin-proof and is easily melted and formed. Although sulphur building techniques date back to the nineteenth century, only recently has sulphur been given serious consideration as a low-cost building material. Many buildings have been built around the world, including one on the San Antonio campus of the Southwest Research Institute, an organization which has pioneered sulphur building research. Southwest Research Institute has developed a method of bonding building block with a low cost sulphur adhesive which makes walls with far greater strength, and durability than traditional mortared walls. The block bonding system can be effectively used by unskilled labor as has been shown by the low cost housing project in Columbia. After a foundation is built and the walls are laid out, the first course is levelled in a bed of mortar and bonded to the foundation with melted sulphur. Blocks are then attached to form the wall. Sulphur is melted with one of a number of possible combinations of talc, glass fiber, asbestos, and dicyclopertadiene. a relatively inexpensive industrial chemical. Unfortunately, the cost of these additives often far exceeds the cost of sulphur. The block bonding mixture is then either brushed or sprayed over the surface of the block, creating a strong impervious wall. The Minimum Cost Housing Group at McGill University in Montreal has experimented with two promising building technologies using sulphur. For the first, sulphur is used with an aggregate to make the block. Sulphur is melted and poured into a mixer in which sand has been heated. The sulphur concrete mixture is then poured into a mold from which it can be immediately removed as a building bock due to sulphurs quick solidification. The MCAG block is designed to be interlocking so that no mortar is needed and can be readily recycled by merely melting them. MCAG has also experimented with the impregnation of cloth and paper with sulphur. The fabric is formed in whatever configuration desired and is then soaked with sulphur, creating a rigid lightweight structural member. If a fabric is allowed to sag in the middle and then impregnated with sulphur, a dome shaped roof panel results. Finally, work has been done with rigid sulphur forms. These forms have the same sort of structural, insulating, and forming properties as other plastic forms, but can be fabricated less expensively. A standard foam gun can be used with only minor modifications. Sulphur building is not without its drawbacks. Sulphur melts at 240° and thus worker’s must be protected to prevent burns. Also, melted sulphur has a powerful odor which, although it soon dissipates, makes construction work a smelly job These, however, are minor problems compared with the potentials of sulphur as a building material.

Page 77

o o Grinder O Volcanic Ash Building Stone Volcanic Ash Pipe Expansion -7 Protection MATERIAL BJ. SERVICE INC.. ARUNGTON NORDMEYER INC. MISSION POZZOLAN DIVISION. MISSION RIO CLAY PRODUCTS DIVISION. MISSION INFORMATION. MAX-S POT. AUSTIN <> NORDMEYER INC.. MISSION’ STRUCTURES FALCON DAM. STARR COUNTY ONE SHELL PLAZA. HOUSTON THROUGHOUT THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY Volcanic Ash Concrete/ Volcanic Ash Brick, VOLCANIC ASH ct DEPOsrrs L-J Volcanic Ash Volcanic ash is not wide-spread in Texas, but is abundant in the Cathoula formation in South Texas as well as in various locations in the Panhandle. It is found in deposits which are as much as 1400 feet deep. In many locations it is surface-minable. At the present time, however, volcanic ash is only commercially extracted near Rio Grande City and Mission. However, since volcanic ash is used for cementing oil wells, it is available from oil field supply firms throughout the state. Volcanic ash has been important as a construction material since ancient Rome. In about 600 B.C., it was discovered that when finely ground ash was combined with lime, a cementitious compound resulted. This substance, called Pozzolan, was the first hydraulic cement. It was not until the nineteenth century that Pozzolan lost its dominance to portland cement. Numerous buildings have been built in the vicinity of the Rio Grande using pozzolan. In addition, the foundations of a number of skyscrapers in Houston and the whole of the Falcon Dam were made with pozzolan cement. Pozzolan is used in many capacities today. Pozzolan concrete in which pozzolan and lime are substituted for some or all of the traditional cement has a number of advantages over neat concrete. It is often cheaper to use, particularly since pozzolan is substituted by volume for cement, but is less dense than cement. Pozzolan concrete has a finer texture than normal concrete and is thus more impervious to water and more tolerant of the freeze/thaw cycles. It is also more resistive to chemical action, particularly to sulfates which are normally quite damaging to concrete. Pozzolan also cures more slowly than portland and, since curing is accompanied by heat, is less likely to crack during curing. Ash can be used to make bricks when mixed with a plastic, clay, and water. It can also be mixed in a seven to one ratio with lime to form a stone-like building block. Both of these blocks are stronger and more resistive than similar blocks made with portland cement. Pozzolan mixed with vermiculite or pumice is useful in the installation of hot water pipes in concrete slabs. When applied as a coating to a pipe, this mixture allows the pipe to expand and contract without damage to the slab. This can be particularly important for solar heating systems which rely on hot water circulating through the slab. Fly ash, a by-product of the burning of coal for electrical generators has properties similar to volcanic ash. It is often more available than volcanic ash and, since it is at present considered a waste product, it is often very cheap. Fly ash can be used in the same ways as volcanic ash.

Page 78

MEAN ANNUAL TEMPERATURE (IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT) INFORMATION <> MATS POT. AUSTIN UNnXRSnY OF TIMS. ARLINGTON STRUCTURES BOLTON RESIDENCE. BASTROP MATS POT. AUSTIN CellarCave Types of Exchanger Vessels Typical Exchanger Section Possible Exchanger Configurations ^.^o <jYN//&NMnUvMN^ Vinter The Relationship of Depth to Soil Temperature Fluctuation Earth - Air Heat Exchanger The principle of the earth-air heat exchanger has been relied upon by man ever since the first humanoid climbed down out of the trees and left the tropics for less hospitable climates. Cave people survived because they could crawl into a hole in the ground and escape the harsh extremes of the climate outside. Cultures throughout the world have relied on the constant temperature of the earth to provide warmth and coolness for physiological comfort (subterranean housing) and for the preservation of food (root cellars). The earth-air heat exchanger is an air vessel buried beneath the earths surface. At depths of 6 to 8’ or more, the earth maintains an almost uniform temperature throughout the year. This temperature is close to the average annual temperature of a particular locality, but is influenced and altered by many environmental and man-made factors. Air passing through a vessel into the constant temperature zone of the soil can be heated or cooled approaching that constant temperature In Texas, where the average annual temperature ranges from 56° to 74°, an exchanger can provide a great deal of the necessary heating and cooling for a house throughout the year. The difficulty with earth-air heat exchangers is determining the proper size for application. An exchanger must have a lorge enough surface area to provide sufficient heat transfer between air and soil. Thus, the air vessel must be either large in cross-sectional area and relatively short, or of small diameter and relatively long. It must also be a good conductor of heat like metal, masonry, or concrete There must also be sufficient air flow through the exchanger to provide the heating or cooling needs of a house. This requires either mechanical blowers or an arrangement such as a solar chimney. Earth-air heat exchanger sizing is an involved and uncertain process. A number of exchanger air vessels have been tested including prefabricated piping, prefabricated vaults, and in situ fabricated vaults. Metal and concrete pipe suitable for individual use is generally of small diameter (6-12”) and therefore must be relatively long. In a site constricted by property lines or soil conditions, the installation of a long pipe could produce permanent alteration of soil temperature by the exchanger itself. These pipes should be no closer than twenty feet from each other. Vaults, on the other hand, can be built with large cross-sectional areas and are therefore shorter. They can be built of indigenous materials but require more labor time to construct and are difficult to waterproof. To insure the economic feasibility and proper functioning of an earth-air heat exchanger, a number of factors must be considered. First, the exchanger must be easy to bury (6 - 8’ of soil above bedrock). Secondly, the air vessel must be kept relatively dry, be properly drained, and situated above the water table. If the exchanger is below the water table, the water must be pumped out. In this case, the exchanger could serve as a water source. Thirdly, the air vessel must be unobstructed and allow free air flow in order to minimize the size of air moving devices. Finally, the exchanger must be sealed to prevent the intrusion of insects or animals. A screening of the air inlet of the exchanger is therefore essential. If carefully considered, an earth-air heat exchanger should provide a long lasting, maintenance-free, and low energy-use source of air-conditioning.

Page 79

REGION OF GREATEST rci SUrTABIUTY FOR LJ WINTER HEATING Insulation is Positioned Over Water Bags To Prvont Solar Heat Gain. Interior Radiates Heat to The Roof Summer Day Summer Night Winter Day Typical Skytherm Sections Skytherm System Using Cast arth-Cement Vaults REGION OF GREATEST |—| surrABiLrrr FOR 1-1 WINTER HEATING AND SUMMER COOLING STRUCTURES GIDDINGS-WILKINS HOUSE. BRENHAI.I ZORN HOUSE. SEGUIN INFORMATION Q FOREST HIGGS. BRYAN foWCS POT, AUSTIN DA. DAVID NAWROCKI, SAN ANTONIO Water Bags Are Exposed the Sun’ and Absob Heat Water Bags Are Exposed the Sun and Absorb Heat Which is Radiated to the Interior. to Uhioh to Insulation ir rcsitioned Over the Water, Limiting Heat Loss. The Roof Radiates Heat to ths Interior. Insulation is Removed Proa | Water and the Hoof Radiates ]V/ Heat to the Clear Night Sky Winter Night Critical Design Factors Typical Sky therm House Configuration Atascadero House Skytherm Rooftop cisterns have been used for centuries in many parts of the world, and their contribution to the thermal stability of a dwelling has long been noted. The Zorn house in Seguin, Texas was built in the 1850’s with a rooftop cistern covering its entire roof. This mass of water was specifically intended to aid in the cooling of the house. However, its effect has been limited. Water covered roofs and roof sprays were developed in the 1930’s as a means of cooling flat roofed buildings. It was not until the late sixties, however, when Harold Hoy combined the concept of the roof pond with movable insulation that an effective passive rooftop air conditioning system was developed. He patented his system under the name Skytherm and built the first skytherm residence in Atascadero, California. The skytherm system relies on water confined in roof ponds by black plastic liners or plastic bags which are in direct thermal contact with the spaces below for its operation. The panels are the sole heat collection, storage, and distribution elements, and provide uniform air conditioning to the area below. Movable insulation panels above the ponds serve as thermal valves, controlling the flow of heat between the environment and the ponds. During the winter, the ponds are exposed to the sun during the day and absorb heat. At night, the insulation is moved over the ponds to prevent heat loss. The ponds radiate heat to the space below At night in the summer, the ponds are exposed and lose heat by evaporation and radiation). This process can only occur effectively in areas of low humidity. During the day, insulation is moved over the ponds and the water absorbs heat from the room below The only external energy necessary is a small electric motor to move the insulation twice a day and, if desired, this function can be performed by a hand crank. The movable insulation which is the key to skytherm’s operation is also its major limiting factor. Special tracks must be constructed on which to move the insulation panels and a mechanical system devised to move it. Also, there must be an area to which the insulation can be removed when the roof is in its open configuration. The necessity provides a number of possibilities for the form of the house. The skeletal structure which supports the removed insulation can be used as a carport or a frame for a solar still or water heating or as a shading device. The mechanical movement of the insulation as well as the flat roof necessitated by the Skytherm prevent its use in areas of relatively heavy snowfall where ice and snow could jam the mechanism. Another limitation of the system is the necessity of supporting the great weight of the roof ponds. Steel decking rests on strong beams which in turn rest on strong columns or thick heavy masonry walls. A possible alternative to the decking system is a system of earth-cement barrel vaults (although this is a totally untested concept). The thermal mass of heavy masonry walls is complementary to the system’s functioning and is thus preferable to a steel or wood column system with infill. Well-built, thick earth walls provide sufficient strength to support the roof ponds. A skytherm system on a heavy thermal mass house which is well insulated should be able to supply most, if not all, of the heating and cooling requirements in a large area of West Texas and the heating requirements in more humid eastern Texas. Its use in the Gulf Coast area is questionable due to the short heating season in this region.

Page 80

REGION OF GREATEST— SUTTABILnY FOR HEATING * uonvectlve and Montezuma’s Winter Castle Summer Summer Radiant Cooling STRUCTURES BOLTON RESIDENCC BASTTOP MAX’S POT. AUSTIN Sizing Information Kelbaugh House Steve Baer ‘vftwater Wall Kalwall^ Tube Water Wall Masonry or Concrete Wall Trombe The trombe system is a modern refinement of a system which has provided thermal comfort for centuries. Montezuma’s Castle in Mesa Verde National Park is an excellent example of such a system, as are the pueblos of Pre- Columbian Americans and many adobe houses. These indigenous systems rely on heavy masonry walls to provide heating. Solar radiation is absorbed as heat by these southern walls and, during the course of the day, the heat moves through the wall to radiate into the interior room at night. Montezuma’s Castle is built under a rock ledge which protects it from the summer sun. The thermal mass of these buildings moderates the diurnal temperature fluctuation during the summer, thus keeping the interiors relatively cool. The trombe system improves on this theory by putting glazing in front of the wall and painting it black. This glazing system, first proposed in 1882, produces the “green-house effect” which allows the solar radiation to penetrate, but prevents its reradiation as heat energy. Trombes innovation was to put adjustable vents in the top and bottom of the wall. This allows a convection loop to be set up, directly heating the air in the space behind the wall. This plenum in front of the wall provides convective ventilation during the summer when the wall is protected from direct heat gain by a roof overhang. This air flow can, in some cases, be used to cool the wall itself. I^lonetheless, some trombe wall configurations provide interior movable insulation to prevent radiant heat transfer during the summer. Trombe walls built up to this time, such as the first U.S. trombe wall in the Kalbaugh residence in Princeton, New Jersey or the trombes in the Bolton residence in Bastrop, Texas, have been cast concrete. However, masonry block walls are equally suitable. Water in containers is a far better heat storage substance than concrete or masonry, but it lacks structural strength. The Steve Baer drum wall, while not a trombe system, has proven the technical suitability and aesthetic desirability of using water in steel drums as a south facing collector wall. The trombe system, for all its technical elegance, severely limits the form of the house with which it is integrated. For optimum collection of solar energy, the trombe wall must be erected on an east west line with a possible variation of about ten degrees. While windows may be placed in the thick wall, they must be limited in order to maximize collection area. The current rule of thumb for trombe sizing is sixteen square feet of wall for every one hundred cubic feet of wall for every one hundred cubic feet of interior volume. This rule is, however, based on houses built in the Pyrennes Mountains of France. To insure an effective convection loop through the space, it should be no wider than twice the height of the walls with a maximum of twenty feet. The space must be relatively unobstructed so as to allow free air circulation. For this reason, trombe houses should be only one room deep unless other means are provided to heat the northern rooms. As with other passive system houses, trombe houses benefit from being well insulated and thermally massive. As in adobe houses, this thermal mass helps maintain a pleasant microenvironment throughout the year but, because the trombe system is primarily a heating system, the trombe is best used when heating is more important than cooling.

Page 81

MEAN EVAPORATION RATE (IN INCHES) SURFACE WATER HIGH IN r-l SUSPENDED SOLIDS LJ Operating Principles Still Weighted Plastic Film Still/ Greenhouse Basin Basin T Still / Array /Equipped for Rain Catchment Air Supported Plastic Tilted Tilted| Tray Wick-Type Still Solar Still Solar distillation is fundamental to life outside of the oceans. All naturally occurring fresh water on earth, whether surface water, ground water, or ice is a product of a global cycle of evaporation, condensation, and precipitation powered by radiant energy from the sun. Solar stills were first developed in the late nineteenth century. However, it wasn’t until recent years that the increasing demand for fresh water has prompted rapid development of solar distillation techniques. Seawater and brackish surface and ground water can be a source of fresh water. All that is necessary is a solar still and abundant sunshine. The operation of a solar still is quite simple. Solar radiation passes through a transparent membrane (either glass or plastic) and heats a thin layer of impure water which flows over or in a heat absorbing black surface. Pure water evaporates and condenses on the membrane above, which also prevents the escape of heat energy. The condensed water then flows with gravity into a collection trough and into a storage tank. The major drawback of solar distillation is the high initial cost of solar stills and their low output. Twenty five gallons of water per square foot of collector per year is a reasonable estimate of solar still performance in Texas. Yields can be maximized by measures which insure minimal heat loss from the still. Insulation of the bottom of the still, movable night-time insulation, and double glazing are such techniques. A thin layer and slow flow of input water also improves still performance. Finally, the still must be watertight in order to prevent water loss by leakage. The basin still is the most basic and widely used still. It is most economical when used in flat terraces or on flat roofs. The greenhouse type (glass or plastic in a rigid frame at an angle of 10°-15° from horizontal) is the most popular basin still. It has the advantage of long maintenance -free service but is expensive to build. Large stills can be covered with single or multiple layers of plastic which can be stretched over a frame, inflated by small fans, or weighted in the center to allow for runoff. These plastics greatly reduce the initial cost of solar stills but their lifetime is limited by deterioration from solar radiation. In any type of basin still, costs can be reduced by using the earth or rooftop as the still bottom and insulating and waterproofing directly over it. Black plastic or asphalt are good waterproofing materials. Basin stills can be built in arrays and their glazing used to collect rainwater. This can significantly increase the quantity of fresh water produced by a still. In areas where rain is infrequent, the surface must periodically be cleaned to remove dirt. In areas of steep terrain, frequent snowfall, or for installation on tilted roofs, basin stills often prove to be economically unfeasible. Two types of stills, the tilted wick still and the stepped tray still, can be used advantageously in these circumstances. In a wick still, impure water trickles through a porous black fabric which allows a large surface area for evaporation and causes the brine to flow slowly at a relatively steep angle. The stepped tray still provides a slow flow and shallow fluid depth by means of a series of terraced trays down which water flows. These trays can be easily fabricated by forming metal foil over a template. Titled stills need cleaning less often and can intercept more radiant energy than horizontal stills. As with basin stills, properly designed tilted stills can be a reliable water supply for individual applications.

Page 82

% MONTHS ■■■
WfTH SEVERE OR EXTREME DROUGHT( ANNUALAVERAGE’ RAINFALL (INCHES) Roaded Catchment Artificially Surfaced Catchment Water Storage Rooftop Cistern INFORMAnON 0 MATS POT. AUSTIN OMSION OF SANTOW ENON^nlTril. TX raVnUENT OF HEALTH AUSTIN NATIONAL WFAT^CR SSMOC Tx wxra developudit bgato. Austin SANrrATlON OTY AND COUNTY HEALTH DS^AHTUENTS TX DeARTVENT OF HEALTH IP with Istem Rooftop Catchment Filtered Underground Cistern Rain jBarrel Water Catchment and Storage Rainwater runoff has been the most important source of water for man since the beginning of time. Settlements, cities, and civilizations have grown up around lakes and on rivers which provided a ready source of water. Catchments and cisterns take advantage of the natural process of rainfall, runoff, and storage on a small scale. There are two basic types of catchments for small scale application: the rooftop catchment and the surface catchment. In areas of heavy precipitation, the rainwater falling on the roof of a building may provide sufficient water. Roof top collectors can either be coupled with a buried cistern or the cistern and catchment can be one and the same. The Zorn house in Seguin has such a rooftop cistern. Rain barrels, which are still common in some places, are an example of off-roof storage. A more sophisticated cistern wastes the initial roof - cleaning runoff and then passes the cleaner water through a simple sand and gravel filter into an underground cistern. The filtering helps insure pure water and underground cistern cuts down on water loss. In areas with infrequent or light rainfall, large catchment areas and large cisterns are necessary to provide sufficient water to carry over between periods of rainfall. In areas where extreme droughts are frequent and prolonged and in extremely arid regions, water harvesting on a small scale often cannot be relied upon to provide a steady source of water. The most economical way to obtain a large catchment is to use the land itself as a catchment. Stock ponds, common throughout Texas, are examples of simple watershed-pond systems. To increase runoff from an area of land, several techniques have been developed. Grading the surface of the catchment area can increase its water yield. Waterproofing the soil can further improve catchment performance. This can be accomplished in a number of ways. Chemicals can be combined with the soil to make it more impervious (asphalt or other surfacing materials can be applied). Plastic sheets or corrugated metal panels have also proved to be effective. These artificially surfaced catchment areas must be protected against destruction or contamination by animals. Surface ponds are the simplest water storage vessel but also allows the greatest water loss, both through evaporation and infiltration, and are most likely to be contaminated. Storage in wooden tanks, masonry cisterns, steel, or concrete tanks are more reliable if more expensive systems of storage. Runoff should be filtered before being stored and may require filtering or chlorination to insure purity if it is to be used for human consumption. Water quality must be carefully monitored to protect the health of the consumers. Catchment and cistern sizing is a process with many variables. Hydrology, climate, and water demand are of utmost importance. However, economic trade-offs with other alternative sources of water supply must also be considered. Local residents and agricultural agents can be valuable sources of information as to the advisability of building a catchment-cistern water supply system.

Page 83

Lil ILL/NU bUHPLUS WATER IN ANY SEASON WINTER SURPLUS SUMMER DEFICIENCY UTTLE/NO DEFICIENCY OF WATER IN ANY SEASON INFORMATION <> LOCAL WATER COI.IPANIES hWCS POT. AUSTIN TX WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD Self Toilet 0 6 and. Toilet Removal toilet |Water ’—- IDispacing Bottle Placed In Conventional Toilet Tank Pit Latrine with Odor Confining Seat Chemical Toilet Pump Faucet 4 O O G A Average Annual Domestic Water Consumption r Tor a Familyd of Four 1 Pressure Flushing Lever Water Conserving Bathrooms In the past pure water has been cheap, plentiful, and taken for granted by the majority of our nation’s population. Municipal and regional supply networks have continuously met the demand for greater and greater volumes of water. The result of this has been a pattern of waste which has become ingrained in the American character. While 70% of the world’s population doesn’t have ‘access to a safe water supply and consume only 2 gallons of water per day per person, an average Texan uses 64 gallons per day. In an age when unchecked growth is starting to outstrip available water supplies, this sort of prolifigate waste is clearly untenable. Studies have shown that nearly 70% of domestic water usage occurs in the bathroom (39% is consumed by toilets while 31% is for personal hygiene). After use, the water is discarded, flushed, and transformed from a valuable resource into an environmental and economic liability. An alteration of Americans’ bathroom habits could yield tremendous water savings. Less baths, shorter showers, limited toilet flushing, and closed water taps are a few of the many water conserving techniques. However, our toilets, showers, and sinks are, by their design, wasteful and must be altered. The simplest and cheapest approach for homes which have normal bathroom fixtures is to retrofit these to reduce water consumption. Flush water can be reduced by bending the armature on the float ball downward and using water displacing objects in the tank. Inexpensive devices are widely available which require continued pressure on the toilet lever to release flush water. In this way, only the water actually necessary for a particular flushing job is released from the tank. Combined sink-toilets, which use water drained from the sink to flush the toilet, can be homemade or ordered. Dual flush devices, tank inserts, small tanks and other water saving devices are also readily available Flow-reducing shower heads and faucets, as well as atomizing shower heads and foot pumps, can nearly halve water consumption in showers and sinks. In recent years, a wide variety of alternate toilets have been developed which greatly reduce or eliminate water usage. Mechanical removal toilets collect excreta which is then removed and disposed of. Chemical toilets replace water with a chemical solution which is then recycled for further flushing. Incinerating and freezing toilets are also available but they merely substitute energy use for water use. A number of systems have been developed which treat human excreta not as a waste product but rather as a resource. The ubiquitous pit latrine is by far the cheapest option and can, over a period of years, produce high quality compost. With a few modern adaptations and some care in siting, pit latrines can be the best alternative for many rural areas. Self composting toilets, first developed in Europe, are now available in the U.S. These toilets turn human waste into rich compost by means of aerobic decomposition. These units can be bought prefabricated or may be fabricated by a builder. A number of integrated water production/use/recycling/disposal systems are in various stages of development. These systems deal with the entire problem of water supply, usage, and disposal rather than an isolated aspect of it. This sort of holistic approach is essential to an effective and lasting solution to the water problem.

Page 84

PRODUCTS PENNWALT CORP. HOUSTON KMP CORP. EARTH KELLER CORP.DALLAS INFORMATION 0 LWeS POT.AUSTIN DMSION OF SANTTARY 9HNE5CNQ. TX OEFAKTMENT OF HEALTH. AUSTIN NATIONAL IVtATHB SETACE AALARIUO COUEOE.AMAFLUO WEST TEXAS STATE CANYON Chain-Pump Increasing Wind Velocity tilth Altitude Ubiquitous Multi-Tuned Windmill tilth Steal Toiler W Sallvlng windmill Mounted on a Tripod Steel Drum Vertical Axis Windmill tilth Conorete Toiler Typical’ Elevated Water Storage Tank Continuous Bucket-Chain Pump Commercial Reciprocating Pump European Windmill w^^lll tilth Masonry Toiler Water Pumping Windmills Windmills, which have been used for a millennium in Asia, first appeared in Europe in the fourteenth century and were used to grind grain and pump water. When European settlers came to America, they brought the windmill with them. Early Texas settlers depended on surface and spring water for their survival but windmills soon allowed homesteaders and cattle ranchers to settle in less hospitable regions. Before a windmill can be considered, a suitable source of water must be located. Geologic maps of a site along with surface indicators of ground water presence aid this search. Test pits should be dug to insure the reliability of the ground water source before a windmill is constructed. Windmills in Texas today are generally old, multi-bladed steel rotors mounted on skeletal steel towers. These windmills have devices which keep the rotors facing into the wind and which rotate the mill out of high winds to prevent damage to the mill. Reciprocating piston pumps are combined with bored wells in order to raise water from low to medium depths. Commercial water pumping windmills are available throughout Texas through commerical well drilling. However, effective homemade windmills are within the technical grasp of most reasonably dexterous individuals. Homemade windmills are of two sorts. AAulti-directional windmills are useful in locations with great variability in the direction of wind. The Savonius windmill can easily be fabricated from bisected steel drums. Likewise, another vertical axis windmill can be made by attaching half drums to a radial spoke arrangement. Single direction windmills are best used in areas with a dominant wind direction such as the Gulf Coast or in deep valleys. Otherwise, mechanical arrangements must be devised to continually face the windmill into the wind. The sailwing windmill, an easily fabricated device, has triangular cloth sails with wire stays attached to radial spars. The windmill is only 25% of a ground water pumping system (the well, pump, and storage tank are the other components). On a site with a shallow water table, hand dug wells may be economically and technically feasible. In these cases, the continuous bucket-chain pump or chain-pipe pump, which can be easily made, may be harnessed to a windmill and prove to be a viable means of water raising. Deeper water tables generally require bored wells and commerical pumps. Deep wells can best be drilled by commerical contractors. A windmill tower is essential to the efficient operation of a windmill. Both wind velocity and power are reduced by surface drag and ground obstructions. Above the surface, wind speed increases exponentially with height. An elevated windmill is necessary to take advantage of available wind power. The tower, however, is often more expensive than the windmill itself. Prefabricated steel towers are widely available but are often prohibitively expensive. If labor is provided by the user, wooden truss towers, earth block masonry towers, and monolithically cast concrete or calcrete towers are attractive alternatives. The tower must be designed to withstand the lateral force of wind on the mill and tower. A water storage system must be coupled with a wind-powered water pumping system. Storage should be provided for prolonged periods of calm. Water tanks may be of any sort but should be elevated above the point of use to provide sufficient hydraulic head. When well constructed and maintained, windmills have proven to be a reliable source of water throughout Texas.

Page 85

References Adobe Soil Location Harrington, E. L. “Adobe as a Construction Material in Texas.” Texas A&M Bulletin 90. 15 December 1945. Building Allen, P & D. Build Your Own Adobe. Stanford University Press, 1947 Bourdeu, E. H. Making the Adobe Block. Random House: New York, 1974. Eyre, T. T “The Physical Properties of Adobe Used as a Building Material.” University of New Mexico Bulletin 263 1 April 1935: 18/ Hansen, E. L “Stabilized Mud for Buildings.” Engineering News Record 2 Jonuary 1941: 39-41. Harrington, E. L “Adobe as a Construction Material in Texas.” Texas A&M Bulletin 90. 15 December 1945. Kirkham. How to Build Your Own House of Earth. Oklahoma A&M: Stillwater, 1946. Miller, T A. H. “Adobe or Sun-dried Brick for Farm Buildings.” U.S Department of Agriculture Bulletin 1720: Washington. 1949 Caliche Deposits Carter, W. T. “Some Relationships of Native Vegetation to Sods and Climate of Texas.” American Soil Survey Association Bulletin 13. 1932: 1-5. Shreve, F. and Mallery, T. “The Relationship of Caliche to Desert Plants.” Soil Science, Vol. 35, No. 99, 1933. Soil Testing Gillette, H. S. “Soil Test Useful in Determining the Quality of Caliche.” Public Roods, Vol. 15, No. 10, 1934: 237-240. Portland Cement Association. Soil-Cement Laboratory Hondbook. Chicago: 1956. Forming Burkhart, E. J. “Investigation of Soils and Building Techniques for Rammed Earth Construction” Research Report 6 Texas A&M Engineering Experimental Station: College Station, 1949. Williams, E. C. and Eastwick, F. E. Building in Cob, Pise and Stabilized Earth. Country Life: London, 1950. Sulphur Deposits Ellison, S. P. Sulphur in Texas. University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, No. H82: Austin, 1971. Evans, G L. and Seilards, E. H Index to Mineral Resources of Texas by Counties. University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, No. MRC29: Austin, 1946. Properties Dale, J. M. “Mechanical Properties of Sulphur Suggest Many Potential Uses.” Sulphur Institute Journal, Vol. 3, Winter 1967-68: 19-22. Sulphur Building Rybczynski, W. and Morse, A. Patent Survey 1859-1974: The Use of Elemental Sulphur in Building Minimum Cost Housing Group Report 7: Montreal, 1975. Testa, R. B. and Anderson, G B. The Use of Sulphur in Housing Construction Columbia University Report: New York, 1969. Sulphur Concrete Dale, j. M. and Ludwig, A. C. “Sulphur Aggregate Concrete” Civil Engineering, Vol. 37, No. 12- December 1967 Rybczynski, W, Ortega, A. and Ali, W, “Sulphur Concrete and Very Low Cost Housing.” Minimum Cost Housing Group Report, No. 7 Montreal, 1975. Sulphur Foam Dale, J. M. “Design Selection and Fabrication of Sulphur Foaming Machine” Sulphur, Vol. 65, August-September 1966: 38-40. Dale, j. M. and Ludwig, A. C. “Rigid Sulphur Foam.” Sulphur Institute Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, Fall 1966:68. Hodgson, G W. “How to Make Foamed Sulphur,” Oilweek. 4 June 1962. Surface Bonding Hubbard, S. J. “Feasibility Study of Masonry Systems Utilizing Surface Bond Materials.” Army Corps of Engineers. Ohio River Division Laboratory, Technical Report 443: Cincinnati, 1966. Southwest Research Institute. Techniques for Sulphur Surface Bonding for Low Cost Housing. San Antonio, 1975 Volcanic Asli Baker, C. L. “Volcanic Ash in Texas.” Bureau of Economic Geology. U T Bulletin, No. MRC2: Austin, 1931. Bloem, D. L. The Effect of Fly Ash on Concrete. National Ready Mix Concrete Association: Washington, 1954. Earth-Air Heat Exchanger Soil Temperature Algren, A. B. “Ground Temperature as Affected by Weather Conditions.” Industrie! Heating Engineer, Vol. 12, No. 15. January 1950: 5-8. Exchanger Performance Scott, K. Earth-Air Conditioning Cools Broiler House to 70° - Outside was 94°. Delmarva Poultry and Farm: Salisbury, 1964. Scott, N. R. “Preliminary Report of Earth-Air Heat Exchanger Studies” Paper No. NA- 64-503, American Society of Agricultural Engineers North Atlantic Region Meeting: New Brunswick, 1964. Skytherm Hay, H. R. “Energy, Technology, and Solarchitecture” Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 95, No. 11, November 1973: 11. “New Roofs for Hot Dry Regions.” Ekistics, No. 183, February 1971: 158-164. Hay, H. R. and Yellot, J. I “Natural Air Conditioning with Roof Ponds and Movable Insulation ” ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 75, Part 1, Paper 2012, 1969: 164-177 Yellot, J. I. and Hay, H R “Construction and Operation of Naturally Air Conditioned Buildings” American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Paper 68-WA/Sol-2, 1968. “Thermal Analysis of Building with Natural Air Conditioning.” ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 75, Part 1, Paper 20B, 1969. 178-190. Trombe Precedents Hitchen, E. R., Thompson, K., and Wilson, C. R. “Thermal Design and Performance of St. George’s County Secondary School, Wellesey.” Institutionol Heating ond Ventilation Engineer Journal, Vol 33, No. 1, January 1966- 325-331. Oliver, R, ed. “Pueblo Architecture.” Shelter and Society. Praeger: New York, 1969. Application Dietz, A. G. H. and Czopek, E. L. “Solar Heating of Houses by Vertical South Wall Storage Ponds.” Heating ond Piping and Air Conditioning, Vol. 22, No. 3, March 1950: 118-125 Hogan, I. “Solar Building in the Pyrennes.” Architectural Design. Jonuary 1975: 13-17 Patton, A. R. Solar Energy for Heating ond Cooling of Buildings. Noyes Dato Corp.,: Park Ridge, 1975:64-73. Skurka, N, and Noor, J. Design for a Limited planet Ballantine: New York, 1976: 122-127 Trombe, F., Robert, J. F., Cabanat, M. and Sesolis, B. “Some Performance Characteristics of the CRNS Solar House.” ISES Congress, Extended Abstracts, Paper 41/8: Los Angeles, July 1975. Solar Stills Howe, E. D “Pacific Island Water Supply Systems Using a Combined Solar Still and Rainfall Collector,” Solar Energy, Vol. 10, No. 4, Oct.- Dec. 1966. 175-181. Manual on water Desalinotion, Vol. 1 Technology. AID Publication, AID/CSD-1440: Washington, 1967 TIeimat, B W and Howe, E. D. “Comparison of Plastic and Glass Condensing Covers for Solar Distillers.” solar Energy, Vol. 12, 1969- 293-304. Water Catchment Water Supply System Design Manual of Individual Woter Supply Systems. U. S. Public Health Service Publication No. 24- Washington, 1963. Wagner, E. G., et al. Water Supply for Rural Areas and Small Communities. WHO Monograph, No. 42, 5th Ed., 1959 Water Harvesting System Design Cluff, C. B. “Water Harvesting Plan for Livestock or Home” Progressive Agriculture in Arizona XIX, 1967: 6-8 Ree, W Q, Wimberly, F. L., Swinn, W R., Lauritzen, C. W. “Rainfall Harvesting System Design.” U.S. Dept, of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service Report. No. ARS 41-184. Washington, 1971. Surface Waterproofing Lauritzen, C W. “Raintraps of Steel. Utah Science, Vol. 28, No 3, 1967 Myers, L. E, Frasier, G. W., Griggs, J. R “Sprayed Asphalt Pavements for Water Harvesting.” Journal of irrigation and Droinaqe Division ASCE, Vol 93, No. 3, 1967 79-97 Rooftop Cisterns Ree, W. O. “Rooftop Runoff for Water Supply U S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Paper ARS-S-133. August 1976. Stephens, D. H. “Water Storage Roof” International Symposium on Roofs ond Roofing Proceedings, Paper No. 22: Brighton, 1974. Water Quality Behrmann, A. S. Water is Everybody’s Business. The Chemistry of Water purification. Anchor Books, 1976. Water Conserving Bathrooms Water Conservation “Don’t Waste a Drop!” Water for Texas, July 1977.11-13. Sharpe, W. E. and Fletcher, P. W. eds. “Conference on Waste Water Conservation and Sewage Flow Reduction With Water- Saving Devices.” Proceedings. Philadelphia. 1975. Alternate Toilets Wagner, E G and Lanoix, J. N. Excreta Disposol for Rural Areas and Small Communities WHO: Geneva, 1958 Warren, W. P. “Sewage Disposal A Review of Alternative Resource Conserving Systems.” Masters Report University of Texas: Austin, 1977 Windmills Ground Water Baldwin, H. L, and McGuiness. C. L. A Primer on Ground Water. Department of Interior, Geologic Survey: Washington, 1963. “Outline of Ground Water Hydrology.” U.S. Geologic Survey, Paper No. 494: Washington, 1965. Wells Anderson, K.E. Water Well Handbook. Missouri Water Well Drillers Association: Rolla, 1966. Gibson, U. P. and Singer, R. D Woter Well Manual. Premier Press- Berkeley, 1971. Windmills and Water Pumping Mann, C. “All for the Sake of Cool Clear Water.” Water for Texas May 1976: 11-13. Molenaar, Aldert. Water Lifting Devices for Irrigation Food and Agriculture Organization of the U. N.: New York, 1956. Wood, I. D. “Pumping for Irrigation.” U S. Department of Agriculture, Paper No. SCS- TP89: Washington, 1950

Page 87

The Caliche Report, Second Edition (1979) The purpose of this discussion is to introduce calcium carbonate, particularly in the form of caliche deposits, as a practical masonry building material. The distribution and availability of caliche and other carbonate materials is investigated. The broad distribution and abundant supply of caliche in Texas are the most important aspects of calcium carbonate technology. The report outlines the basic qualities and attributes of unfired masonry materials and shows the information and techniques necessary to use caliche according to these criteria. Current technology in forming, equipment, production schemes, and labor requirements are discussed and illustrated with examples. Physical and engineering data is presented for comparison to other unfired masonry construction modes. A resource section is provided listing regional resources pertaining to caliche, including information, equipment, materials, and contact persons. Finally, published and unpublished material referred to in the text is compiled along with additional publications for those interested in more detailed investigation on the subject. Caliche is used extensively throughout western and central Texas as a road base material and as a raw ingredient in the production of cement and lime. However, there are only a few references to the use of caliche in building construction. Indurated or rock-like caliche has been quarried and used as building stone in South Texas. In Wheeler County, there are several structures built with stabilized caliche. One such structure was thirty-five years old in 1945 and showed no cracks at that time. These early attempts at stabilizing caliche were extensions of the research into soil cement building nodes. Soil cement research grew out of the developing science of road building, the housing problem in the United States associated with World War II, and the need for low cost housing in less developed countries Soil cement refers to the stabilization of a soil or earth material with cement. The stabilization of soils with other agents, such as blood and dung, has been practiced throughout the world for centuries. Our experience with soil cement and caliche building modes over the last five years suggest that caliche has tremendous potential as a low cost building material for a large part of Texas. Caliche is a predominantly carbonate soil deposit found extensively in the Panhandle, West, Central, and South Texas Caliche is easily accessible and readily available. It has been mined in may places for roadbed material and it can be acquired from suppliers in many areas. Caliche building techniques are simple and based on the well established technology of soil cement. Our research demonstrates that caliche building materials are strong, durable, inexpensive, and possess useful thermal characteristics.

Page 88

IN SrrU WEATHERING: CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL BREAKDOWN OF CARBONATE BEDROCK LOWER LEVEL BEDROCK: CARBONATE MORE WEATHERED <.8 -.>. LESS ^• > WEATHERED A DESCRIPTIVE-EVOLUTIONARY CLASSIFICATION OF CALCRETE TYPICAL OF OGALLALA AQUIFER AND SOUTH TEXAS TOPICAL OF EDWARDS AQUIFER TOPICAL OF OGALLALA PLAINS TYPICAL OF COASTAL REGIONS NON-LIMESTONE BEDROCK LIMESTONE BEDROCK DUST AND LOESS CLEAN SAND OR GRAVEL WITHOUT I AND LAKE DEPOSITS SILT AND CLAY (INCLUDING FORMATIONS PULVERULENTS. HAVARA. AND — OUST AND1 AEOLIANITE) | GROUND WATER STAINING MIXED TEXTURE SOIL CARBONATED GRAINS — SHEET-FLOODS, SOLUTION. RE-PRECIPITATION, RE- । GROUND WATER VENEER CEMENTATION. AND REPLACEMENT MIXED TEXTURE SOIL CALCIFIED SAND OR GRAVEL.IN EARLY STAGES CALCRETE CONGLOMERATE IMPREGNATION DIFFUSED FILAMENTS, SCATTERED I NODULES (ACCUMULATION DIFFUSE), PETRIFIED ROOTS DISRUPTION (INCLUDING PSEUDOANTICLINES) NODULES BECOMING CONCENTRATED CHEMICAL REPLACEMENT OF MOST OF THE ORIGINAL I CONSTrrUENTS BY CALCIUM COALESCING NODULES CARBONATE HONEYCOMBING DISCONTINUOUS HARDPAN WrTH PIPES SECONDARY PRECIPTTATION: CALCIUM CARBONATE IN UPPER LEVEL LEACHED DOWN AND PRECIPnXTED IN LOWER SOIL LEVS- (PLUGGED HORIZON DEVELOPING) HARDPAN (CROUTE ZONAIRE, CROUTE LAMELLAIRE, HARDPAN. CAPROCK. RIMROCK. KAFKALLA. LAMINAR HORIZON) BOULDER CALCRETE CALCRETE GIBBERS OR DEBRIS There are three major forms of caliche occurring in nature, a) bedrock (including limestone, dolomite, chalk, calcareous clay, sand, and carbonate sediment; b) soil consisting of calcrete and caliche; and c) biological sources including shells of molluscs such as oysters and clams. Soil calcium carbonate is generally the most desirable form in terms of its particle size, sand content, and accessibility. Because of the confusion about the terminology of soil calcium carbonate, the popular term “caliche” is used to refer to soil with any amount of calcium carbonate present. The percentage of calcium carbonate is roughly described as slightly calcareous, calcareous, highly calcareous, or as calcrete. The category is determined by the amount of induration or hardness of the material and the material’s ability to fizz in a ten percent solution of hydrochloric acid. Calcrete generally refers to a completely indurated calcium carbonate accumulation formed in the lower soil horizons and containing a high percentage of calcium carbonate. The three basic models of caliche-calcrete formation are 1) in situ weathering of carbonate bedrock; 2) secondary precipitation in the middle and lower soil zone; 3) primary precipitation from surface and sub-surface waters saturated with calcium carbonate. In situ weathering and secondary precipitation are the predominant processes but no one process operates to the exclusion of the others. In situ weathering occurs with the chemical and mechanical breakdown of the carbonate bedrock into finer and finer soil particles with time. Secondary precipitation operates through two different processes, both occurring in arid to semi-arid climates. One model involves water from intermittent rainfall leaching down through the soil, dissolving calcium carbonate at or near the surface and redepositing it in the lower soil horizons. The other model requires upward movement of water through the soil by capillary rise due to surface evaporation.

Page 89

^’. •t-l.:| CALICHE: C^T^-rl HIGHLY CALCAREOUS SOIL CALICHE: [z£:^i221 SLIGHTLY CALCAREOUS SOIL CALICHE: ^^^ >^^ LIMESTONE BEDROCK rarara caliche: CHALK BEDROCK IfW SHELL | | NON-CALCAREOUS Soils in Texas vary widely in percentage amounts of calcium carbonate and in the physical occurrence of caliche deposits. Calcrete in the Southern High Plains of the Panhandle (Ogallala Formation) and in South Texas (Reynoso Formation) are thick, starting at a few feet in thickness and in depressions up to fifty feet. They are either partially or completely indurated and contain a high percentage of calcium carbonate. Other areas of significant caliche accumulations are West Texas soils and some lime or chalk-like deposits in the Edwards Plateau. Generally, caliche can be found, at least in patches, everywhere west of the Balcones Escarpment running through Central Texas. Depending on your area, there may be several sources of caliche available. First, check the building site. Using information and tools in the “Soil-Test Mini Lab” and “The Handbook for Building Homes of Earth,” the building site may be field checked for soil suitable for earth construction. The basic procedure consists of setting up a grid system for the site so that the area may be covered completely, sample locations identified, and the extent of usable materials determined. Because of the amount of materials to be handled, a carefully executed soil survey will save time and effort later on. The next step is to collect samples of sufficient size for testing purposes, e.g. one half pound for preliminary tests and two to three pounds for further testing of the most promising samples. Samples should be bagged and tagged. A dirt auger is the best sampling tool, requiring less labor than a shovel. It is very important to collect the samples from the sub-soil below the layer where the plant matter and other organic materials are present. Organic material is detrimental to soil cement and adobe. The decaying process produces a gas reaction which weakens the soil beyond limits for use in building. When collection of the samples is complete, the first phase of testing can begin. Even if there is no caliche available on site, it may be acquired locally. Three phases of testing are desirable for best results in earth material construction techniques. The first is the chemical analysis and the basic soil characteristics of the earth material to determine its suitability for stabilization. The second phase involves testing the various experimental mix proportions for compression strength, absorption, and surface durability. These tests will determine the final mix proportions. The third phase of testing involves quality control checks during block production. These tests are the same as those in the second phase and serve to maintain block quality and pinpoint problems in the mixing operation.

Page 90

RESULTSMIXTURE EXPERIMENTS LIME STABILIZER LIME STABILIZER A-C Varying the proportion of sand and caliche in an attempt to reduce the amount of sulphur in the final mixture. A-C There is only a narrow range over which the sand ratio can be varied. A large percentage of caliche weakens the block, e.g. greater than 45%. This suggests that we can lower sulfates and keep good strength by maintaining a 55% sand to 35% caliche ratio. D-F Sodium hydroxide and sodium bicarbonate additives to improve stabilization and strength. D-F Additives of sodium bicarbonate and sodium hydroxide produce generally unsatisfactory samples in terms of poor surface hardening and high cost. G-I Varying the amount of quicklime stabilizer to determine the effects on strength and setting time in relation to costs of materials. G-I These samples had the best strength and texture of this set of lime stabilized mixtures. Observations and test indicate that more than 6-7% quicklime causes a loss in strength and a greater susceptibility to erosion. J-0 Sodium bicarbonate, sodium chloride, and cornstarch additives to test for improvement in strength and absorption. J-0 Additions of salt and cornstarch produced totally unsatisfactory samples. Cornstarch is particularly difficult to work with and the samples show little or no cohesiveness. P-Q Varying the water content and material consistency to determine optimum setting times and ease of form removal. P-Q This set of samples indicated that the amount of water in the mix is critical in terms of workability, initial setting time, and development of strength. Moreover, the critical range of moisture content is narrow (14-19%). In practice, the less water the better. LP1-LP2 Reduction of the amount of quicklime and an increase in the amount of caliche to check strength and lower costs. LP1-LP2 This sample is similar to sample H. This mixture however has a greater percentage of caliche. The LP series has the greatest strength of the lime stabilized samples. It has acceptable absorption, a moderately hard surface, and fine texture. PORTLAND CEMENT STABILIZER PORTLAND CEMENT STABILIZER PC1-PC3 Varying the amount of portland cement and the size of the sand aggregate to determine the optimum strength and absorption. PC1-PC2 There is a definite relationship between higher compression strength and a greater percentage of cement. There is also a complex relationship between the absorption and the particle size of the mix components. There is a reduction in the absorption with finer size caliche and coarser size sand. PC4 Lowering the caliche/sand ratio to increase strength. PC4 Increasing the sand/caliche ratio improves strength and allows a reduction in the amount of cement. PCS Substitution of crushed limestone for course sand in the aggregate portion of the mix. PC5 Substitution of crushed limestone for chat produces an acceptable mix, but the absorption is increased and the strength reduced. POZZOLAN STABILIZER POZZOLAN STABILIZER PZ1 Addition of pozzolan as a partial replacement for portland cement to reduce sulfate and increase resistance to sulfate attack, decrease absorption, and reduce the cost of materials. PZ1 These samples had a very fine texture, good strength, and excellent absorption (about 9.6%). However, the curing time is longer, about 3-4 weeks. An optimal caliche should contain forty to sixty percent calcium carbonate with a wide range of particle sizes but with at least thirty percent in the silt and clay size fraction. Forty to fifty percent of the material should be non-carbonate, silica sand with most of the sand falling in the size range of coarse sand to pebble size gravel (0.5mm to 10mm or 1/50” to 3/8”). The caliche should contain little or no carbonate clay. A significant amount of non-carbonate clay would place the material in the category of soil cement, requiring slightly different techniques. The caliche should also contain little or no organic matter. Decay of the organic material yields a gas reaction which is detrimental to the strength of the caliche mix. Analysis of the material will tell whether more sand , of a particular size or another more carbonate caliche is needed. The next step is the determination of which stabilizer is best suited for the material and its design uses and the amount needed for a satisfactory mix. Our experiments to date have focused on three materials: lime, cement, and pozzolan (a fine grain, reactive silica material). Data on design mixes and variations are presented above. Determining the amount of stabilizer to use is a more difficult problem. The Alcock Shrink Test, which is used in the design of soil cement mixes, gives only a general, ballpark figure when working with caliche. The figure is often low, especially when lime is the stabilizer of choice. We have found that the best method is trial and error experimentation in certain percentage ranges for each of the stabilizers. The range for lime is five to fifteen percent, for cement five to ten percent, and for pozzolan/cement seven to twelve percent. The method consists of making up fest cylinders of the material with varying amounts of each stabilizer and testing them for compression strength, moisture absorption, and surface hardness. A few batches should determine the best mix balanced against the cost of the stabilizer. There are advantages and disadvantages for each of the stabilizers. Lime is inexpensive but presents some health hazards to workers breathing its dust. There is also some question about the long-term strength of lime stabilized mixes but there is no conclusive evidence either way. Cement is an expensive material and its production requires a large input of energy. However, it produces the strongest block. Pozzolan is a plentiful resource in Texas but no market exists for it at this time and so it is therefore unavailable in most areas. In terms of material cost and good construction qualities, we feel the pozzolan/cement combination is the best stabilizer. There are some specific problems that arise when carbonate mixes are used as building materials. Sulfates attack caliche mixes from the inside as well as from the outside. The compounds which are most damaging are calcium sulfate (gypsum), magnesium sulfate (epsom salts), and sodium sulfate (glaubers salt). Some approaches used to control the sulfate problem are ^reduction in the amount of free lime, sulfates, and aluminum compounds present in stabilizers through the use of other additives in partial replacement of the cement of lime, for example pozzolan; 2) dilution of the free lime and sulfate percentage in the caliche material by increasing the sand/caliche ratio; 3) protection of the building from sulfate bearing waters; and 4) reduction of the porosity of absorption of the block through the use of finer size materials.

Page 91

KEEP IT UGNTI USE W HARDWARE CLOTH MIXING CURING SOIL ANALYSIS CALICHE-H AS A BUILDING MATERIAL FORMED WITH HOUSE HOLD CHEMICALS CALICHE BLOCK YOU MUST KNOW THE COMPOSTION ANO CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE CALICHE. ANALYSIS CAN BE DONE WITH PROPER MACHINERY (MAX’S MINI-LAB) DESCRIPTION CALICHE IS COMPOSED OF UP TO 30^ CALCIUM CARBONATE. HIGH LIME CONTENT ENABLES IT TO BE STABILIZED ANO GIVE THE BLOCK STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES. PVOOLE FORMUI ADOBE STYLE SIFTINGJ MANUFACTURINGSIFTING REMOVES IMPURITIES DRY CALICHE SIFTS EASILY. IT SHOULD NOT BE LEFT DAMP AS IT CAN SOLIDIFY; HOWEVER, DAMP CALICHE HELPS WITH MOISTURE DISTRIBUTION. ZD C , _____
r^AniPEN. UNTIL M|XIS CCD^,1 £i4rA NcY gfsawdvsT/ soueezeO INTO UALL-OKdP 31- |f%0F Ball. SHATTERS-m/<i5 «rADV PER SLOCK COM^IMc ’.. 9 lb SAND 8 |OCAUCHIS ,1 V^2 IbCEM^NT CJNVA RAM A FLAT NON­ IN A SHADED. WATERPROOFING CAN BE DONE WITH A CLEAR ACRYLIC MASONRY SEALER OR PLASTER CALICHE IS FORMED IN SEMI-ARID CLIMATES BY THE EVAPORATION Of SURFACE WATERS CARRYING CALCIUM BICARBONATE PRECIPITATED IN THE INTERSTICES OF SANO AND GRAVEL ROOF TILED SPENOED BURLAP ALLOWS MIX TO TAKE ON CATENARY FORK BUILT IN-PLACE MIX WLTH HJItr.^ NOMIMAL Sl^E CURING TIME IN DAYS ^|| CALICHE BUILDING 5Y5TEI15 EARTH-AIR HEAT EXCHANGERCAvmr BLOCK PUT 170-17.5 Iba. MIX PEA BLOCK IM THE CIMVA RAM. TAMP CORNERS TO INSURE PROPER DISTRIBUTION OF MIX. DEPRESS HANDLE AND COMPRESS BLOCK. THERE SHOULD NOT BE EXCESSIVE RESISTANCE AS THE RAM MAY BE DAMAGED. OPEN THE MOLD ANO POP OUT THE BLOCK. REMOVE CAREFULLY TO AVOID BREAKAGE. -| STACK THE BLOCK ON J ABSORBENT SURFACE AREA. BLOCKS MUST BE KEPT COVERED ANO MOIST 3-5 DAYS. BLOCKS CAN BE USED 7-10 DAYS AFTER MANUFACTURE. THE GEOLOGY OF TEXAS LAST WHOLE EARTH CATALOGUE CALICHE BLOCK PROCESS . Q PEREE UIRTH-AIR HEAT EXCHANGER FORMED 0NSPUT 55GAL DRUMS MIX WATER-FILLED BAG PLACED IN DITCH .SURROUNDED BY MIX. AFTER Ma HARDENS REMOVE WATER AND BAGREARWAU. OF GREENHOUSE PRODUCTS WALLS TROMBE OR ttmeauise LABORATORY FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS There are two modes of earth material construction: monolithic walls and molded blocks. Additionally, two methods are applicable to each mode. The caliche mix in a moist state may be pressed or rammed mechanically (i.e. pressed block and rammed earth). The material in a wet state can be poured into molds adobe- style. Rammed earth construction consists of a slip form, similar to that used in pouring concrete, in which a layer of caliche is mix is placed and tamped. Pressed blocks are produced by pressing the mix into a mold. A mold press can easily be constructed or one of several machines can be used. Four such machines are the CINVA-Ram, Landcrete, Winget, and Ellson. Our experience is with the CINVA-Ram, a hand operated device which produces one pressed block at a time. The production rate is 200 - 300 blocks per day with a compressed strength of 900 - 1300 psi. Adobe-style, wet caliche mix can be poured into forms of any shape and size. It can be used in a monolithic wall slip form, a block mold, a “sag” form, or cast in place as pipe or conduit. The puddled caliche mix has several advantages over pressed block. The strength and durability of the block is excellent, as good or better than soil cement and adobe blocks. There is greater versatility in block sizes and molds. More block can be produced easier and faster using gang forms without the need to use expensive machinery to press the blocks. However, there are a couple of good machines available that, with proper supporting equipment, will produce up to 1500 adobe size blocks per day. Rammed earth construction requires a higher level of skill than the two block techniques. The slip form must be constructed carefully of good materials so that it can stand repeated use. The moisture content should be checked frequently with the Ball Test. Care must be taken in distributing the soil material evenly in layers of the correct thickness and in ramming the material evenly and consistently.

Page 92

1. SIFTING Sifting removes impurities. Dry caliche sifts easily, it should not be left damp as it can solidify. However, damp cliche helps with moisture distribution. Use 1/4” hardware cloth.
2. BALL TEST Squeeze a handful of mix into a ball and drop 3 feet. If less than 50% disintegrates, the mix is too wet.
3. WEIGHING THE MIXTURE The weight should be between 17.0 and 17.5 pounds mix for each block in the scale.
4. MIXING A good mix is 4 parts caliche, 5 parts sand, and 1 part cement. Combine ingredients thoroughly. Cement can vary: 1/4 to 1/2 parts additional gives faster psi but adds little to the ultimate strength.
5. OILING OF RAM Using a kerosene/gasoline base lubricant, grease the inside surfaces of the ram thoroughly. Repeat the procedure after five to six bricks are fabricated.
6. CHARGING Put mix in the cinva ram, tamp corners to insure proper distribution of mix, and smooth off the surface.
7. WATERING Add water slowly until the mix is damp, not soaked. Water to “ball test” (8-10% by volume).
8. METAL PLATE Place a metal plate inside of the mold of the ram.
9. COMPRESSING Depress handle and compress block. There should not be excessive resistance as you or the ram may be damaged.
10. EXTRACTING Open the mold and pop out the block.
11. REMOVING Remove carefully to avoid breakage.
12. CURING Stack the block on a flat non-absorbent surface in a shaded area. The type and amount of cure is critical. The best procedure is to cover and dampen at least five days, then air dry for 7 -10 days.

Page 93

2 4 5 6 All 10 -“/At 9 One of the major aspects of earth construction is the handling of materials, especially in terms of labor, equipment, and space. The amount of material can be very large (a minimum of fifteen tons of sand and earth for a small structure is not unreasonable). The processing of this material will require a significant input of labor, time,.and equipment. The first step is stripping the topsoil from the excavation area before the caliche can be removed. The excavated caliche is then transported, sifted, perhaps crushed, and stored in an area protected from moisture. The sand, caliche, and stabilizer are mixed and poured into forms. Blocks must have an area for curing and then are stored or transported to the building site. Obviously the right equipment, coordinated labor, and sufficient area are needed for a reasonably efficient block production effort. On any scale, some equipment will be needed for extraction, at the least a bulldozer or tractor equipped with a shovel and a back hoe. If the caliche is purchased from a local supplier, a truck will be needed to haul it to the production site. The site should be accessible for trucks carrying the component materials; smooth and flat if blocks are to be puddled in forms and large enough to store materials and blocks. One half acre is necessary for a small commercial operation. Block Production; A General Scheme

1. Extraction of caliche with bull dozer and/or front end loader.
2. Transport to production site in large trucks.
3. Dry the caliche material and control the compositional variation by spreading the material in a 6- 12 inch blanket on the ground. The first layer should be allowed to dry in the sun for several hours before the next layer is laid over the first.
4. The material is then removed from the layered pile so that each layer is thoroughly mixed.
5. This material is then sifted through 1/4 or 3/8 hardware cloth or wire mesh. It may then be desirable to crush the waste and sift the material again.
6. Store the sifted material in a dry place away from moisture, so as to prevent clumping of the material and reaction with any chemical in water. 7 Mix the components in a mortar mixer or concrete mixer according to the proper formula, keeping a constant check on the moisture content.
7. Lay a sheet of 4 mil plastic under the mold.
8. Lubricate the mold with a little water or wax every 4-5 batches.
9. With shovel or wheelbarrow, dump mix into the mold.
10. Spread the mix evenly in the form. Shake the form to help the mix to settle into the corners.
11. After the form is filled, remove it by lifting it up, move on and repeat the procedure.
12. After one to two days, the block may be rotated to the long edge for curing, 14 Blocks should ideally damp cure for four to five days before stacking or moving. Blocks should cure (air dry) 10- 14 days before transporting or laying in the wall.
13. The blocks need to be protected from direct sunlight for the first five days and protected from rain during the entire curing process.

Page 94

EQUIPMENT SCHEMES LABQR EVALUATION FOR THE PRODUCTION OF 50,000 BLOCKS MANHRS —ACTIVITY SMALL SCALE INTERMEDIATE SCALE LABORERS TASK MACHINE RATE TIME Sifting wood framed, hardware cloth mechanized sifter, vibrating screen, rotating drum, etc. 5 excavation and transportation bulldozer, front- end loader, 3 trucks 60 cu. yd./day 5 days 80 Crushing water-filled tank with handle crushing machine, pug mill, etc. 1 handling materials shovel, tractor 20 cu. yd./day 80 hours 80 Mixing 9-12 cu. ft. mortar mixer or concrete mixer 1 cu. yd. self-loading concrete mixer 2 sifting screen 15 cu. yd./day 20 days 500 Hauling shovels and wheelbarrows shovel tractor or front end loader 2 crushing water filled hand roller 20 cu. yd./day 3 days 48 Molding gang mold, hand released mobile block machine with hopper, mold, release lever 2 mixing mixer — 200 hours 400 Block Handling by hand, wheelbarrow, dolly forklift 2 block forming block machine, wheelbarrows 250 blocks/hr 200 hours 400 i Storage/ Transportation pickup and/or trailer pallets, flatbed truck 3 handling and storing forklift 1000 blocks/hr 50 hours 150 Labor minimum 2 people Rate of Production approx. 500 adobe size block per day minimum 4 people 1000 -1500 adobe size block per day TOTAL EQUIPMENT SCHEMES FOR BLOCK FABRICATION

1. Simple two-form puddle mold
2. Hand pressed block (CINVA-Ram, Landcrete, Ellison)
3. Gang Mold, hand release, slow set
4. Gang Mold, hand release, quick set a. hand tools - mixer operation b. motorized wheel barrow - mixer operation c. tractor shovel - mixer operation
5. Mixer over Gang Mold, slow set, hand release
6. Ready mix, mobile mold wrth hopper and lever release, quick set
7. Mixer over gang mold, quick set, hand release
8. Separate mixer, hopper, wheeled mold with lever release, quick set
9. Automatic pressed block - Hi Sibley
10. Automatic pressed block - Winget Materials Cement: $4.80/100 lbs Quicklime: $3.00/100 lbs Pozzolan: $2.40/100 lbs Sand: $3.60/ton Caliche: $1.35/ton 1,658 manhours (33.16 manhours/1000 blocks) Caliche Blocks Dimensions: 4” x 10” x 14” Weight: approx. 39 lbs General Formula by dry weight Sand: 57% Caliche: 35% Stabilizer: 8% Material Amount for 1000 blocks Sand: 11.12 tons Caliche: 8.54 tons stabilizer 3,120 lbs Cement Stabilized Sand $40 Caliche $12 Cement $150 Total $202 $0.20/block Quicklime Stabilized $40 $12 $94 $146 $0.146/block Pozzolan/ Cement $40 $12 $106 $158 $0.158/block Labor and equipment schemes will vary considerably depending on fabrication technique, available resources, scale of production, and the efficiency desired. The table above presents two simplified equipment schemes, distilled from the Centers experience and particularly applicable to caliche mixes. Considering the methods of block fabrication, the best overall results are achieved using the puddling technique. It is simple, fast, relatively inexpensive, and produces good quality blocks. The two models incorporate the puddling technique on a small scale, amenable to the owner/builder and, on an intermediate scale, more applicable to a contractor, commercial venture, or a community collective. The cost of material will vary considerably from one locale to another. Caliche and crushed limestone will cost between $1 and $2 per ton FOB. Prices for sand will depend on its availability and its grade. Cement and quicklime vary little in price depending on transportation costs. Pozzolan is not readily available. If available, it should cost no more than half the price of cement. The analysis is based on generalized data obtained during the course of a recent caliche construction project. The above labor evaluation itemizes the block production process by individual tasks showing the approximate rate of production and the number of man hours needed to process 300 cubic yards of caliche in the production of 50,000 adobe size caliche blocks.

Page 95

POINT RESOURCES Potter County 1 J. Lee Milligan Kretzer Pit Randall County 2 Diel Jake several pits 3 Gilvin Terrill 4 j. Lee Milligan Bailey County 5 Diel Jake Lubbock County 6 Kerr Construction Co. 7 Lubbock Asphalt Products, Inc. 8 Commerical Pavers 9 Strong Paving Co. Midland County 10 South Texas Construction Co. Wright caliche pit Brazos County 11 Texas A&M University Engineering Experiment Station Agricultural Experiment Station Extension Service published Information, Research, & Lqb Wheeler County 12 Several caliche structures locations unknown (check with County Agricultural Agent) Travis Counly 13 Texas Crushed Stone Co. RED Georgetown, TX 14 Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, 8604 Webberville Rd., Austin, TX design, testing, and information 15 Pavillion a caliche structure by CMPBS 6438 Bee Caves Rd., Austin, TX 16 The Earth Lab 1706 Karen, Austin, TX earth construction, design, and testing; machines available including puddle block machine and pug mill crusher 17 University of Texas Bureau of Economic Geology Austin, TX information and maps (land resource and mineralogic atlases) 18 University of Texas Department of Architecture CaCO3 precipitation in seawater for underwater structures 2 ^2 4 5 6 8 9 10, 79| 15 ^ 18, !9) ?4 (5, INFORMATION EXTRACTOR O STRUCTURE Kerr County 19 Hill Country Youth Ranch Box 67, Ingram, TX caliche block-making and caliche structure in progress 20 Happy Krause commercial caliche block making Calhoun County 21 Lone Star Cement Corp 402 Concrete Ave., Houston, TX 22 Parker Bros, and Co., Inc. 5303 Navigation Blvd., Houston, TX Son Patricio County 23 Lake Corpus Christi State Park PO Box 1167, Mathis, TX quarried caliche block structure 24 South Texas Construction Co. 25 Heldonfels Bros. 5200 Up River Rd., Corpus Christi, TX Jim Wells County 26 Oran-Joe Deal 27 Bill Wright Caliche 28 Ochoa Construction Co. 29 C. E. Boyd and Sons Childress County 30 Gelvin Terrill Dallas County 31 Air Craft Tooling Inc. 1623 Avenue X, Dallas, TX foamed earth technology

Page 96

1984 CLIENT: Centro para la Investigacion y Documentacion de la Costa Atlantico FUNDING: Oxfam; The Rubin Foundation; Trocaire PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Gail Vittori; Richard Newbold Adams, Tani Adams, Margo Gutierrez, Milton Jamail (advisory team) In 1984, the Center was commissioned to research, plan and design a large- scale housing development in Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua, home to the Miskito Indians. The once lush area had lost its natural resource base due to widespread cultivation of banana plantations. As a result, traditional building materials were scarce. The response, described in the following paper, was to assess indigenous and by-product resources anew in collaboration with community members and devise a regionally appropriate building system supported by decentralized, small-scale energy, water, wastewater treatment and food production systems that could be readily replicated throughout the Atlantic Coast region. The reality of an active civil war with international dimensions prematurely curtailed the Centers active work on this project. NICARAGUA’S MISKITO INDIANS

Page 97

Bio-regional Planning and Appropriate Technology for Nicaragua’s AAiskito Indians (1984) This presentation describes in brief the research and organizational procedure undertaken by the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems to set into motion a large scale indigenous housing program under the sponsorship of the Center for Investigation and Documentation of the Atlantic Coast (CIDCA), an autonomous Nicaraguan research organization. The project was funded by The Rubin Foundation (US), Oxfam (England) and Trocaire (Ireland). This project responds to a housing shortage among the Miskito and other indigenous peoples of Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast, which is exacerbated daily as people are driven from their homes and villages to seek refuge from attacks. The housing is specifically adapted to the culture and traditions of these peoples, and corresponds to the availability of skills and materials within the region. The presentation goes through the methodology used by the Center so that one may obtain the background necessary to develop a region’s indigenous potential from a natural and human resource standpoint. The procedure includes two principle parts: A) the Planning Methodology and B) the Development Procedure. The first part is an identification process beginning at the macro level of the global biome that shows other world regions which share similar resource attributes as Nicaragua’s East Coast, so that human experience in dealing with similar resource conditions may be borrowed from. The process ends with identification of who will become the human resource participants in the project. Part B shows how all physical and human resources, once found, are brought together into an integrated step-by-step procedure for the development of an appropriate housing system. It is important to realize that the housing project is just in the beginning stages since only eighteen weeks have been spent on-site by the Project Coordinator. This, however, was enough time to do the planning, most of the materials testing, and the design for a building system that could accommodate the four hundred plus homes in the project’s initial phase.

Page 98

PLANNING PROCESS ®©M[i Z UJ <0 (O III <n co < co O UJ UJ Z SKILL SUR. HOUSE SUR. TRAINING/ EQUIPMENT FINANCE CLIM. LAB SOILS LAB MAT. LAB MEDIC. LAB NUTRI. LAB WAT. LAB PHASE 3 RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION PHASE 1 INFORMATION SHARING PHASE 2 RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION HOUSING FOOD MEDICINAL WATER WASTE ETC. PART A - PLANNING METHODOLOGY The planning methodology used for this project consists of three phases: 1) information sharing at the biome level as described later, 2) area resource’ identification involving the identification of potentially useful natural resources within the project area (for housing in this instance), and 3) the point resource identification phase which consists of identifying the available human resources, including equipment, that are being used or may be used to develop the area resources in the project area. Phase Three also includes a housing survey and training program. These phases are diagramed above. PHASE 1: BIOME IDENTIFICATION In the project’s first phase, preliminary work was done to identify the broad spectrum of experiences responding to the combination of resource conditions commonly found in this type of Tropical Savanna and other closely associated biomes, on-site and in other parts of the world. This biogeographic information base is a development of the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, and is used to familiarize ourselves and our clients with the problems and potentials that similar regions throughout the world have experienced under similar physical conditions related, in this case, to housing. This is done in order to supply the project with the most complete historical and up-to-date information available. The procedure begins by utilizing the biogeographic map developed by M.D.F. Udvardy for the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources prepared under contract with UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Program. The resource map, shows where similar plant and animal life appear. For our purposes, this resource map, containing fifteen different biomes, also becomes an indicator of similar patterns of soil, climate, hydrology, etc. subsystems within each biome pattern. Along with plant and animal types, these subsystems become the basis upon which many indigenous technologies depend. We then combine this map with an inventory list of private and public institutions around the world which deal with a particular topic being researched. If, for example, we are dealing with indigenous materials, we bring out our constantly expanding list of institutions that have been using or researching indigenous materials in their particular geographic location. We then literally overlay this list with all geographic locations of all these indigenous materials institutions with the biogeographical map and send of a series of search questions dealing with various major housing components to those institutions which correlate geographically with the biome under consideration. In the case of Nicaragua’s East Coast, we find ourselves sharing similar resource conditions with nine other areas of the world that are within our particular Tropical Grassland and Savanna biome. As we check out our list of institutions, including building research laboratories, grass roots non-profit appropriate technology groups, private laboratories, and individuals, we send off our search request. This direct search’is also paralleled by searches into various data bases in the U.S. through keyword and geographic town/country indexes that already are contained in some of these data banks that we can cross-reference into our biome areas. Our own data base of institutions cross- referenced to the IUCN, map identified forty-seven groups doing indigenous materials work in our global biome of Tropical Grasslands and Savannas, which is spatially mapped below. It was from this type of search that such diverse topics as coconut coir reinforcement, laterite clay cement and laterlite clay low temperature brick making were discovered. At times, our investigation went beyond the biome in certain sub-category areas such as soils. For example, it was found by investigating building research in general regarding latisol-type soils which exist both within and outside the biome boundaries (into sister biomes), that some very low energy use latisol block fabrication techniques have been discovered in relation to laterlite soils in Ghana in a sister biome called Tropic and Humid Forests. It was found that soils from that area have produced a lime stabilized block under pressure of 300 Kg/cm(2) and cured at only 208°F with a resulting compression strength of 1523 PSI. These will be more fully described under the section called Area Resources. Sister biomes are spatially adjacent to the parent biome being used as point of reference They often share one or more characteristics with the parent biome; in the case of the Tropical Humid Forest Biome, it shares parent soil types, mean annual precipitation, and climatic zone.

Page 99

PHASE 2 - AREA RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION By using the investigatory processes outlined in Phase 1, we are better able to understand and ask the necessary questions regarding the potential resources that we may find on-site. This is an important procedure for the following reasons:

1. We may better ask local people the necessary questions so that we can better understand available building options.
2. There may be no pre-recorded use of certain available resources that could be of use to the local population if the skills required to develop them meet the local skill standards.
3. We may use biome criteria to design and choose the necessary equipment within a building material testing laboratory. Ideally, the area resource identification process therefore occurs through two different means: at the larger scale of the biome which sets the standard as to further searching the possible range that one should expect to find at the on-site bioregion level; the other at the micro scale of identification using a laboratory. Combined, these two levels of identification become a kind of learning system that is almost self-critical at one end by showing what is hypothetically possible and what should be looked for, while at the other end what actually test out identification-wise to be present and whether these materials that do exist are useful for building. Some of the accompanying area resource maps for the Puerto Cabezas Project follow. taw-— kL;^-’------------‘°poonro CAIDIEZAS INDOGIEWOOJS NCDGJSONG ODROJIECTQ AREA RESOURCE-MAP RICE AS SOURCE FOR RICE HUSK USED IN CEMENT MANUFACTURING taum4--------------PQDIEIRirO CABEZAS INDOGENOUS HOUSING PROJECTQ AREA RESOURCE MAP ^ KA Li. PIIWTHKUIC Tn,UPUlT3 PUinMIC OKIhOXIC TtOPUDULlS porairo CABEZAS INIDOGENGQIS NOUSONG PROJECT Q AREA RESOURCE MAP HIGH ALUMINA CLAY KAOLINITE SOILS FOR FIRED CLAYS CEMENT SQUTCE: miAELI STUOICS AREA RESOURCE MAP PINE WOOD FOR LUMBER, WOOD CHIPS. FIBER. SAWDUST BCATTrna uurcu KMi:HUi TUMA gputaTo:: IlZCABCZAS: POJERTO CABEZAS INIDOGENOIDS NOODSONG taK—.M’-.j °— $CM1:KUB 10 PUDERTO CABEZAS QINIDOGENOUS NOOSONG PROJECT Q lih’hbbhhiU diputaro:: ^CASCZAS. AREAJBE^QURCEilAE PRECIPITATION QUANTITIES FOR USE AS ON SITE CISTERN WATER SOURCE rm 110-100 ■QOmM EJ in-ioo ■oomu LfmT’---------- ;°PUERTO CABEZAS INDOGENOOJS NOSING PRGUECTQ ra cixxiiuT PALM ahe^re^QUHCEMAE UXOOQ FIBROUS MATERIAL FOR. REINFORCING

Page 100

THE LAB The laboratory design derives from this investigatory procedure. Its equipment, contents, and laboratory procedures lean toward what might be expected to be found not only around the information that exists on the site itself. Often, however, this approach is cost prohibitive and one must settle for a close approximation to what is known in the regional site conditions. Our laboratory included the following: basic soil classification equipment including sieve analysis screens with shaker; Atterberg limit device; two weighing scales; oven; salinity tester; pH tester; compression tester; water absorption tester; water spray test; five pound earth ramming device to determine optimum soil moisture and strength of rammed earth; high temperature potters kiln; high temperature thermometers; and liquid limit tests specifically designed for potentially cementatious materials. A summary of findings from this combined research can be divided into five general areas. These include: 1) compression materials; 2) reinforcing; 3) materials used for combined compression and tension; 4) preservatives and paints; and 5) insulative and transparent materials. Compressive materials include indigenous cement, fired clay materials, and stabilized earth. More specifically, we found cement type possibilities to be derived from waste rice husk, burnt kaolinite clay, and lime based materials. Portland type cement also seems probable. The quantities of these materials was found to be extremely plentiful including thirty-four tons of rice husk ash cement wasted within Puerto Cabezas each year, 14,800 sq. km. of kaolinite clay useful for possible cement production when fired and mixed with lime, and five to ten square kilometers of lime based materials which can be fired and mixed with clay for portland cement production. As a fired clay material, the 14,800 sq. km. of kaolinite clay also contained perhaps as much as twenty square kilometers of high grade china quality clay material. Together, these clays, when fired, could produce many housing components including sewer drainage pipe, sinks and lavatories, brick, floor tile and roof tiles. Last, earth materials that are not fired include pressed laterite soils utilizing a lime admixture. This latter material processing technique could have the potential of utilizing the kaolinite which is a latisol thus placing this building technology at merely equal to the 14,800 sq. km. base material category. In the category of reinforcing materials we found six prospective materials with a history of processing and use existing in other geographic biomes. These include: coconut fiber, pepta palm fiber, pine fibers, various bamboo species, and elephant grass. Of these, the coconut fiber and pine fiber have had the most use and experience where a high degree of success has resulted from their use with concrete type reinforcing applications. Materials useful for compression and tension in the form of roof joists, columns, and lintels, etc were the wood species. This category included native species such as pine, zopeiota, bamboo, leucaena, and eucalyptus. The unique attribute about building materials based on plant species is that relevant species can dominate and upset the potential for the proper propagation of regional species. Species that therefore looked like potential candidates for an experimental and controlled introduction procedure were looked at particularly if their growth rates and environmental companies, candidates which tolerated the poor soil, high clay and high flooding conditions of this tropical location were the following: Australian pine (ironwood), Australian acadia, gumbar. India blackberry, and Indian almond, a Trema species from Madagascar, and Eucalyptus grand is from Brazil. Preservatives and plants can be derived from combinations of plant and mineral based materials. A preservative called fout, for example, is derived from the truck and roots of the pine tree species in the project area. Resinous materials that are the basis for shellacs, varnishes, lacquers, and paints are derived from a series of plants referred to as Copals, a number of which could be grown and already grow in the region. There is the possibility that the well-known Nim tree from India could be introduced for purposes of producing a safe pesticide for other less tolerant but more plentiful wood species. Insulative and transparent materials could be derived from a combination of waste wood from sawmills in the form of chips and sawdust combined with cement to make building panels that are self-supporting and moderately insulating. This well-proven technology can also incorporate rice husk in place of wood, according to one building research group in India, discovered through our computer data base searches of groups in this biome. Approximately twenty square kilometers of a high grade silica sand for glass manufacturing was found about thirty kilometers northwest of Puerto Cabezas. PHASE 3 - POINT RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION The third phase of the planning process involves the identification of the human resources found within the project area. The human resources are identified as the skills relative to the prime area resources within the region and the tool and equipment capability of the local population relative to the development of the region’s resources. The financial requirements result from the deficiencies of the above combined survey. The skills, equipment, and other facilities required are most often only partially fulfilled when we compare the ideal point resource combination necessary to develop the regions resources to what actually exists at the present time. This need gap results when a local population has become dependent for one reason or another on external political and economic forces that have resulted in a skills and equipment shift that no longer relates to the capabilities of the

Page 101

region. This gap between what is presently used and what could be utilized from within the region itself is reflected in housing deficiencies, skill deficiencies, and equipment mismatches which in the end culminates in an identifiable economic deficit in the region. The latter occurs because the region had been forced more and more to depend on outside goods and services at the expense of developing its own productivity potential in order to remain internally stable or develop into a small scale exporter of certain goods not found in other neighboring regions. Housing Survey General:

1. Nearly all families who had a home wanted to have it repaired; if they did not have a home, they wanted a home similar to their traditional housing.
2. Nearly all families wanted to have their own backyard garden. They also desired fences to keep out stray animals.
3. Most families wanted their small backyard businesses, if they had one, reinforced through economic or other support. Building Related:
4. Nearly all metal roofing was found to be in disrepair, usually leaking (with 120 in. rainfall per year) and too hot in the tropical sun.
5. Better sanitary facilities, including the availability of private water supply, latrines, and safer waste water disposal.
6. Better cooking facilities that depended on inexpensive fuel sources, although kerosene stoves were preferred; also in this category was the need for better food storage facilities.
7. Since most structures are elevated for purposes of receiving good breeze and protection from animals, good floor structures were required but usually in disrepair as were steps. The survey that was made in Puerto Cabezas and the surrounding region was therefore designed to help identify this gap; first in housing, then in skills and equipment. Once this information is compiled, the biotechnology/bioregionai planning team helps to formulate the development process described in the following section. Ideally, this final development process step follows a line of least resistance; i.e. incorporating the maximum number of existing skills without retraining, using the maximum amount of existing equipment and facilities without importing more, while subtly transforming the whole into a regional manufacturing entity. This procedure does not at all imply that a regional manufacturing facility should result, but more likely that individual skills and family enterprises are reinforced by better connecting one small business to the other and to a regional material base that can better guarantee long term stability. The above describes briefly some of the discoveries made in our survey with indigenous people of Easter Nicaragua. SKILLS AND EQUIPMENT SURVEY Approximately twenty-five skills and equipment sources have been identified within and immediately around the Puerto Cabezas town proper. The following skills areas were identified: Masonry Block and Masonry Sink Production; Welding and Machining; Thatch Roof and Corrugated Roof Installation, ■ Lumbering, Sawmilling, and Planing; Baking with Brick Oven; Small Boat Fabrication; Gasoline Engine Repair (all sizes); Backyard Gardening, including many edible native plants; Basic Cistern and House Plumbing; Septic Tank Manufacturing; Heavy Equipment and Road Scraping Capacity; Carpentry; Sheet Metal Fabrication; the Use of Forges. In most all of the above cases, inadequate back-up equipment existed that was in serious need of repair. An exception to this was the overabundance of electric welding machines, especially in the vocational school, where no welding rod exists. The repair and maintenance of sawmilling equipment was well covered. CABEZAS POINT RESOURCE MAP 1 SAN PEDRO CONCRETE BL. YARD 2 SAN PEDRO CONCRETE SINK YARD 3 ABANDONED CONCRETE BL. YARD 4 RD. PAVING CONCRETE BL. MACE 5 RICE HUSK MILL 6 OLD KILN FIRE BRICK 7 CHARCOAL KILNS 8 2-6’ MAT. SALT WATER TUBS 9 CEMENT MIXERS 10 FRESH WATER POND 11 SAND AND GRAVEL SIEVES 12 RICE HUSK INCINERATOR 13 BALL MILL COMPONENTS 14 ROLLER FOR FIBER SEPARATION 15 OSCAR PALMER ROLLER FOR FIB. SEP. 16 SHEET METAL WORKING 17 WELDING 18 MACHINE SHOP 19 FORGE 20 LUMBER MILL 21 OS. PALMER CARPENTRY SHOP 22 CHURCH CARPENTRY SHOP 23 AUTO ELECT. SHOP 24 ELECT. MOTOR REPAIR 25 WELDING EQUIPMENT 26 WELDING SCHOOL 27 WOOD WORKING SCHOOL 28 SHEET METAL SCHOOL 29 TANKS FOR PRES. PROCESS 30 ELECT. AT SALT WATER EDGE 31 SAWDUST PILES

Page 102

PART B - THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The Development Process brings together into a development sequence the various natural and human resources that have been identified in the Planning Process as they relate to the existing conditions in order to supply the requisite housing for this project. First, three resource components were identified: Area Resources (useful mapped physical resources that could, when processed, fulfill human needs for materials); Point Resources (the equipment and skills necessary to transform these raw materials into usable products); and Network Resources (the recording of already existing lines of activity from raw material to final housing components). Together, these activities represent examples of how Area Resources and Point Resources can be brought together to represent various levels of product development, all the way to a housing prototype. Essentially, the Point Resources (skilled people and their associated equipment) act as transformers of energy, materials or information supplied from another Point Resource or transformation process. The connections between these Point Resources (or transformation entities) consist of a flow of money, materials, energy or information. As you will soon recognize, since some of these flows do not exist because the point resources do not exist, we outline optional development alternatives in order to compare the number of non-existent and existent point resources represented in one development sequence vs another. The first phase of the project has identified most of the area resources, point resources, and some of the networks necessary for an indigenous housing project to occur in the region. We have also identified all those parts that need to be created in order for complete product development to occur. Phase II will place quantifiable units on the necessary production and flow capacities required, so that we can measure both existent and non-existent activity against a production goal. Primary Production can be identified as the primary product resulting from first level processing; i,e. coral into lime or trees into lumber. The Secondary Production list includes all primary production categories and adds to it more finished materials; i.e. indigenous clay sources into bricks or roof tile, or lumber into building components ready for home construction. Secondary Production, therefore, represents enough steps within the whole production process that when it is correlated to point resource equipment and skills, points can be connected so they show a diagrammatic representation of the entire production process. AREA RESOURCES POINT RESOURCES PRIMARY PRODUCTION NETWORK RESOURCES INTERACTIVE FIELD MATRIX In order to represent the entire process from Area Resource identification through to Network, we have utilized a management tool called an interactive field matrix which has the ability to relate variables in a continuous manner. However, it was necessary to add two important elements to the matrix in order for the continuity between area, point and networks to be understood. These elements were: primary production and secondary production. AREA RESOURCES NETWORK RESOURCES POINT RESOURCES Network Resources are represented when flow and transformation processes are identified by labor organizations. For example, cement product manufacturers are linked by common suppliers, resources, and transportation means. In a similar way, one can identify clay products, lumber products, metal, hardware, sanitation facilities, energy equipment manufacturers, etc. Depending on the stage of development within the social and institutional infrastructure, one can find trade organizations that are organized either around production sequences (such os concrete product manufacturer associations) or around different stages of end-products (such as raw material suppliers, product manufacturers, energy producers, building contractors, etc.). By recognizing both the horizontal and vertical orders of organizations, different types of coordination can be recognized. For example: (vertically) overall production of masonry products, both cement and clay, can be better coordinated to meet the structural wall goals for housing; or (horizontally) water issues related to working conditions, safety, pay, etc. can be discussed at the different supplier levels, from mining at one level through to subcontractors who together can be represented by worker organizations at another level. Organizations which already exist can aid in these organization efforts. If they do not exist, these different associations might gradually be created so that human production and technical production issues are fully recognized to foster a home building industry which can function in the long term.

Page 103

POINT RESOURCE 3l: wrT.TOoe w.iui l•V^i lADiatbOB 00 oata.thMM. :aK.toCTnuc,- ,$I„O ,••• mow® rco. xut&UL ami .«!^A.l_______
QICT’IC!” qvtaetu. :iuajL,,u.. U,KfU___;. uinO lA., _ EAtMO macuoc RUM VATill v^via — liUUJLaM-___

• 1 It I..,/„AWCV DWtil, CCLUMBS ! Xtevt. 1 M.i„ riao -L. ‘leva ruca. :oceawT coua I।‘DWAint ^0itc*ic PCI N-T RESOURCE minn iircx. iri inn____ IIXX___________ .in inn in— AimnwA A xr UMwr aAT____ 4innn rmoA mr liter .tn nnizcraxi .maim — rrnATTiinti O 5 O In aijuci iou.u CHOOSING A DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY The Final housing development process is chosen by considering a combination of factors that try to fit the need for the number of required homes into the simplest strategy of utilizing the existing natural and human resources, recognizing environmental and sustainability parameters. This strategy is chosen from a variety of development alternatives that cover each major part of the physical housing environment. Six major housing components were chosen. These include: Materials (roof, walls, floor, foundation); Climatic System; Water System; Sanitation; Food Preservation; and Insect Issues (human and material requirements). Each of these physical components with their individual alternatives were diagrammed in a similar analysis, as was the rice husk ash cement shown earlier. A simplified version of the materials components in the form of walls and foundation, roof, and water and sanitation is shown above in order to give some concept of the work procedure. Each development strategy covering major building components was critiqued using an appropriate technology assessment procedure sheet, as briefly outlined above. This critique approach assesses the skills and equipment used in a given development strategy against two major parameters: Ecological Constraints and Network Resources. The Network Resources in turn deal with the four primary network flows of information, money, materials, and energy. Depending on the depth to which a project can be taken, this critique process can become as quantitative as necessary. For example, it can be shown that if a cement development strategy were chose, that per dollar increase in output, the cement industry is one of the highest users of energy and one of the lowest users of labor. On the other hand, clay fired products and wood products show much better ratios regarding both energy expenditure and use of ore local labor skills. Other factors affecting choice of production means was the accessibility and quality of prime materials such as wood vs masonry products. Since the Savanna was over-lumbered, wood products are now more difficult to acquire whereas clay and cement products are closer to the are of Puerto Cabezas. The final housing component choices are diagrammed on the following pages and are in response to this investigation.

Page 104

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES ROOF THATCH PALM TILE FIBER GEMEBJT CLIMATE SYSTEM MASONRY/SBLT WOOD/WASTE STILT WEST COAST SANDING BLOCK/BRICK ON GROUND STRUCTURE FIRED BRICK PRESSED BLOCK CONCRETE BLOCK FERRO CEMENT WOOD CHIP PANEL WATER/WASTE WATER WELUOUTHOUSE CISTERN/SEPTIC TANK CENTRALIZED WATERAVASTE QEVELOPEMENT ALTERNATIVES STRUCTURAL WOOD FRAME EIRIQ ORICK PRESSED Rinrr

1. WOOD

TRANSPORT 1 SAWMILL } FUEL SIZINR MILL FASTENERS • KAOLINITE , TRANSPORT Y SEPARATOR Q MOLDER O KILN 6 FUEL I KAOLINITE V.&.. I TRANSPORT ) PRESS I LOW TEMP HEAT ) BRICK LAVERS 0 PtESERVATlVES © BRICK LAYERS UlniKLALQU mROCEMENT 0 O 3 O O C LIME7CLAY TRANSPORT KILN FUEL( BALL MILL’( BAGSING/STOR( SANO/SRAVEL( TRANSPORT( WASHERS/SEIVES ( MIXING( MOLDING( BLOCK LAYERS( D lime)clay1 P TRANSPORT< QKILN( P FUEL( D BALL MILLq ,BARGING, D SANO/GSAVEL( P TRANSPORT( ) WASHERS/SEIVES! ) COCONUT FIBER( I FIBER EXTRACT | FORMING nLIME/CLAT nTRANSPORT 4 KILN pFUEL pOALL MILL )BASGIHG )‘SANO/GRAVEL ) TRANSPORT° I WOODCHIP WASTE I MIXING , FORMING LOOSE FIT ANCHOR HOLE SO TILE MAY BE UFTED TO REPLACE THATCH UP FOR HOLDING ___
THATCH STEM IN PLACE FIRED KAOLINFTE CLAY HALF HOLE ON BOTTOM EDGE OF TILE FOR HOLDING THATCH OVERLAP RAIN UP THATCH FIRE CLAY PALM TILE One example of studies done showing the use of local skills and labor combined with on improved product still totally based on indigenous materials. In this case aday roof tile using a type of clay historically used for pottery by Miskito Indians incorporated into a specially designed tile that uses another traditional k ^e P° ? to keep the sun off the roof. The palms can be replaced simply by lifting the tile from inside the dwelling and placing new stems and ^aves (even tied in the traditional manner). The proposed roof would therefore be fire proof from within and cool due to the shading and, just as importantly, include a more advanced combination of indigenous skills.

Page 105

SOME FABRICATION EQUIPMENT BEING TESTED PROPOSED HOUSING UNIT SAWDUST PANEL PRESS TABLE PALM TILE ROOF WASTE WOOD CHIP EXPANSION PANELS VERTICALLY LAYED HOLLOW BRICK WrTH BAMBOO REINFORCING LUMBERED JOISTS AND FLOORSHORIZONTALLY LAYED HOLLOW BRICK PROPOSED UTILITY UNIT SEPTIC TANK VENT FIBERCRETE CORRUGATED ROOFING COLD CABINET AGAINST CISTERN FOR FOOD STOVE ON LEEWARD SIDE FOR VENTILATION CEMENT SINK PLUMBED INTO SIDE OF CISTERN FOR WATER SOURCE AND DIRECTLY INTO SEPTIC TANK FOR DRAINAGE GUTTER BATHROOM DOOR CISTERN WATER STORAGE STORAGE CABINET ABOVE GROUND SEPTIC TANK FOR GRAVFTY FLOW EVEN DURING FLOOD FIELD INTO NONEDIBLE PLANTS INDIGENOUS HOUSE SLIP FORM FOR SEPTIC TANK/CISTERN .ciniwo HoiirorrAL JOIST

Page 106

1989 CLIENT: City of Austin, Texas FUNDING: City of Austin, Texas; The Urban Consortium, Public Technology Inc. PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III, Rich MacMath, Gail Vittori in collaboration with Qty of Austin staff: W. Laurence Doxsey, Michael Myers, Doug Seiter In the 1980 s, Austin had a nationally recognized market-based energy conservation program. A call to the Center from the City’s Environmental Conservation Services Department in 1989 opened the door for the Center to introduce the idea to expand the successful energy conservation program to other resource areas— water, materials, and waste—reflecting a life cycle, systems-based resource flow model developed by CMPBS. The resulting public-private partnership between the Center and the City of Austin, funded by Public Technology Inc’s. Energy Task Force, created the Austin Green Builder Program—to our knowledge, the first green building program in the world. The world, it seems in retrospect, was ready for this more systems-based, albeit simplified, market-ready approach. At the 1992 UN Earth Summit, the Austin Green Builder Program was recognized as one of twelve exemplary local environmental initiatives—the only recipient from the United States. The following year, David Gottfried, Rick Fedrizzi, and Mike Italiano founded the U.S. Green Building Council, acknowledging Austin’s Green Building Program as one of the inspirations to establish a nationally-based organization to advance green building. In just a few short years, green building had entered the public lexicon. USGBC’s work on LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) began in 1995, inspired by the Center’s conceptual framework that sparked Austin’s groundbreaking initiative. And, as they say, the rest is history. AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER PROGRAM

Page 107

Sustainable Rating System: A Conceptual and Contextual Overview for the City of Austin (1991) The City of Austin is in a unique position to introduce basic sustainability concepts into a framework that could shape the future of the city’s built environment. With over a ten year history of nationally recognized, effective energy conservation programs in place, the introduction of other resource issues (water, materials, waste, and energy) with a different focus, into the City’s market-driven programs is timely and appropriate. The resulting Energy Star Sustainable Systems Rating Program and associated Green Builder Program are designed to evaluate the relative sustainability of resource options, and provide incentives for builders, designers, and potential home buyers to implement sustainable technologies and design options. At its inception in Summer 1990, the Energy Star Sustainable Systems Rating Program appeared unique in concept and to break new ground in what seemed to be logical evolution of almost three decades of environmental design which, for the most part, concentrated on optimizing energy efficiency and promoting energy conservation. (Similar efforts, limited to a few geographic regions, including Texas, also highlighted water efficiency.) Such efforts brought to the publics attention the enormous resource dependencies created by the way buildings were built and technical systems designed, and resulted in a design approach and an array of technologies to enhance energy efficiency. However, the singular focus on energy conservation obscured from the public’s view a multitude of other ecological impacts—equally if not more important- brought on by the built environment, and virtually ignored opportunities for integrating the various resource issues into a comprehensive approach. Non-point source pollution, soil erosion, ozone depletion, global warming, deforestation are only a few of the ecological phenomena that have become familiar concepts to the American public over the past decade, each of which have obvious links to a built environment void of a comprehensive approach. Clearly, the ecological impact of these shifts in global equilibrium places as big a threat on local and global environments as do those resulting from an over-dependence on fossil fuels. Even so, public awareness, institutional attention, and appropriate responses have, for the most part, been long overdue. Throughout the course of this project, there has been lengthy discussion to determine appropriate measures to introduce the information to two principal markets: a) professionals involved with the built environment, including builders, architects, developers, real estate brokers, and designers; and b) prospective home buyers. Since there is a fundamental conceptual leap involved to take these two audiences from understanding “conservation,” which, essentially, is a linear function, to grasping the more complex notion of “sustainability,” considerable time has been spent on the graphic representation of the body of information resulting from this project. Specific recommendations for the project’s initial public outreach include: a) easy-to-identify icons developed to identify the particular resource systems, and subsystems; b) a self-rating system, designed to enable home builders and home-buyers to evaluate material and technology options, from source, to use, to re-use/recycle potentials; c) the selection of themes to introduce the public to each resource issue; the specific themes are chosen because of their potential high impact and easy implementation; d) identification of positive, viable options.

Page 108

I. Sustainability vs. Conservation as the Basis for Rating The development of any rating system is determined by how one defines the benchmark upon which the rating is based. For example, a benchmark based on the best state of the art technology using reduced use or reduced flow criteria is one method. Such an approach assumes a constantly sliding benchmark point as technological innovations develop, and may change from month to month. However, as soon as one realizes the multitude of technologies addressed in this effort related to energy, water, solid waste, and materials, one can appreciate its magnitude. Adopting such a benchmark approach would mean that each individual technology would constantly have to be rated relative to a constantly changing pool of technologies to indicate relative values, new criteria would also have to be added as new concerns arose. The potential unwieldiness of this type of approach, coupled with a basic inability to systematically track thousands of products each year or even depend on others to track such products, led to a decision to rethink the fundamental nature of a benchmark specifically as it relates to a sustainable rating system. During the projects early stages, it seemed appropriate to develop an approach which more closely reflected the basic elements of sustainability. Primary to this was formulating a systems-oriented approach which could absorb the key issues under consideration relative to the four resource areas: energy, water, solid waste, and materials. The approach stresses the importance of the relationship between technologies, not simply the energy input/output relationships, or the efficiency of water use, or material use, or solid waste use within a particular process. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of resource use is undertaken, resulting from analyzing the general sequence of where a particular resource comes from (Source), how it is used (use), and opportunities for secondary and tertiary uses (Integrate.) In this sense, optimizing quantity used in the Use category is less important than matching Source with Use, and providing for proper cycling of the particular resource in the Integrate category. In summary, the approach assumes that linkage, or resource cycling, is more important than optimization of individual technologies. Evaluating how inputs, outputs and, especially, by-products of one technology’s relationship to another within and among businesses, homes, and factories is a vital step in assessing the nature of pollution. Also provided is a different model for how the environment can be used through reliance on certain technologies, and how other technologies can replenish the environment. II. Relational vs. Numeric Rating Systems If inter-relationships are more important than individual entities, what should a rating system be for sustainable technologies? We believe it can be far simpler than rating systems based on numeric- or inter-comparisons of efficiency within families of technologies. For example, if it is agreed that, in terms of sustainability, it is more important that the waste heat from an air conditioner is used to heat a home’s water, and thereby replaces the need for a water heater, then this integration has greater significance in saving overall energy and material resources than would result from the individual optimization and rating of each one of these technologies. Such a framework for evaluation can be extended to virtually every technology within the four resource categories. • Is it more resource conserving to install a less efficient air conditioner in a weatherized home than simply optimizing with a high EER air conditioner in a non-weatherized home? • Is it more resource conserving to use wastewater for watering the garden rather than lowering water use through a low water shower and sink heads and then using potable (treated) water for landscape irrigation? • Is it more resource conserving to buy petroleum-based containers than ones made of paper, the latter of which can be composted and used for landscaping (growing more trees) and gardening, thus reducing the waste stream through recycling? • Is it more resource conserving to insulate a building with cellulose made of recycled paper (thus potentially supporting local industries) instead of importing foam-based insulation manufactured in another region of the U.S. which has some questionable impacts on human health? Even though these examples are simple, they represent the essence of a sustainable rating program. Moreover, this type of thinking can be extended into every facet of how sustainable systems are viewed as compared with conservation systems in the traditional sense. The importance of this approach is that by using relational thinking instead of quantitative data, greater and broader participation occurs since the basic evaluation methodology is easy to understand. The simplicity, then, makes it possible for the rating to be initiated by individuals in the community as well as coordinated through and reinforced by the City program. The important point here is that the consistency is maintained in the system regardless of user. How, then, does one actually rate or assess technologies by using such an approach? At this point there are a number of other questions that must be asked relative to developing a rating system. A key issue, obviously, is whether the system is likely to be used. A rating system’s ability to be used depends on three key elements: • First, is it relatively easy to develop without needing to create complicated testing and rating criteria? • Second, is it easy to initiate, that is, are different sectors of the population able to understand it and perhaps even enjoy working with it, resulting in a broad spectrum of the population eventually participating? • Third, is the resulting rating reliable and meaningful? As has been implied from the onset, we believe that linkage, or the connection between processes, is far more significant gauge of sustainability than simply conservation or single-use optimization. Furthermore, linkage holds enormous value relative to a comprehensive assessment of resource conservation and is, basically, an easy concept for people to grasp. Thus, a rating system based on the number of linkages between processes can be the rating system: A point for each linkage, or point of integration. From the users’ end will emerge an appreciation of resource cycling, and a rich array of opportunities once options and evaluative criteria are clearly expressed.

Page 109

III. Establishing a Sustainability Model and Defining Parameters as the Basis for Rating What, then, are the overall implications if the rating system is based on how well a given technology connects to another, or to a spectrum of regional processes? The type of technology chosen and the extent to which a particular technology is used is determined by the environment’s capacity to supply a certain resource under conditions of a sustained yield. For example, it has been shown that six hundred acres of northwest timber forest can supply about twenty-five homes each year using typical wood framing techniques without depleting the forest floor of essential organic matter and minerals, or resulting in excessive run-off or erosion. Moreover, it can be shown that through a systematic approach to replenish nutrients into the forest floor, that this yield may be increased, thus creating a full cycle, a sustainable system. In Austin, part of a similar cycle is underway at the Hornsby Bend wastewater treatment facility where higher plant species (hyacinth or duckweed) are used to treat wastewater. By co­ composting these plants with sludge from the City’s wastewater treatment plants, a highly marketable product, “Dillo Dirt” is produced. The Dillo Dirt is available for City landscaping projects and for sale to local landscaping businesses and retail outlets. In this way, the region’s soils are replenished. Other examples exist that are specifically relevant to our local ecology. We know, for example, that structural lumber is not one of Austin’s dominant native flora, but that the region does have many soil types suitable for construction. Thus, an important exercise would be to assess the extent to which these soils could be used for building without conflicting with the region’s agricultural activities, or otherwise threatening ecological balance. Similar analyses could be made for the regions agricultural wastes which have been shown to have value as construction materials. Sustained yield implies a full cycling or replenishment of resources. Thus, overall linkage between technologies and the environment becomes the ultimate benchmark in the rating process. For example, if one were to base their development or individual home on the use of any number of regional resources

• from rainwater catchment, to earthen walls, fly ash cement (from coal plants) for foundations, and mesquite tile floors, for example - with attention to the concept of sustained yield, and employ some means to replenish the resources used, the cycle would be sustainable. Therefore, as our understanding of the local ecology becomes more refined and sophisticated, one can comfortably extract within the parameters of the region’s carrying capacity. Boundaries are particularly important in systems thinking since they help provide operational criteria necessary for developing conceptual and operational models. Boundaries appear to be different according to the human life support system being addressed, whether it be renewable energy, materials, water, or solid waste assimilation. Thus, boundaries imply not only different geographic areas, but reveal the variable natures of the individual life support systems. One of the challenges associated with devising a sustainable rating program, therefore, is to work as closely as possible with what is available - close at hand - thereby reducing reliance on resources from regions we know little about. A solid data base revealing the range of uses and abuses resulting from establishing regional resource reliances is key to a viable sustainable guidelines and rating system. IV. Identifying a Conceptual and Operational Model as the Basis for Sustainable Rating Four basic components are identified as essential to an idealized sustainability model, in order to keep a city system in balance over time while using natural resources from the region and by-products within the city proper. These components are:

1. a definition of the environment with respect to specific resource use and its availability
2. the identification of life support requirements basic to human needs (such as the four identified in this project)
3. a monitoring technique to sense environmental tolerances regarding natural resource use as well as replenishment techniques
4. the flow or amount of resources needed by people, on the one hand, and by the environment, on the other, in order to retain the necessary balance between use and regeneration. The purpose of this conceptual model (seen above) is to grasp the entire cycle necessary to incorporate any technological sequence into a sustainable sequence. In other words, the goal of a sustainable rating system should be to provide the requisite functional ingredients as outlined in 1 to 4 that test the full scope of a technology-resource sequence on the environment and on people. Responsibility for making such a model operational falls into the public sector (e.g. governments and citizen groups) which actually represent the environment and its resource base, and the private sector (users and businesses) and education, which help to ensure that the integrity of the sustainability rating is maintained. ENVT 2 MONITOR 3 HUMAN NEEDS ENVIRONMENTAL TOLERANCES

Page 110

A third important sector to add is education at upper and lower levels. The education sector provides perspective relative to the viability of the conceptual framework, and intact channels to disseminate information related to the approach to people from kindergarten on up. Age appropriate information resources can be developed to effectively convey the basic sustainability concept and rating. The public sector’s role, specifically that of the government, is that of gatekeeper, which oversees monitoring activities, encourages public participation, involves business and industry, and creates opportunities between the private and education sectors. The City’s role is to attract industries that are consistent with the basic tenets of sustainability, and provide reinforcement mechanisms that result in “leveling the playing field” between sustainable, conservation, and conventional industries. The private sector becomes the hard core base of the sustainability program. Builders, real estate brokers, developers, and local industries are the essential feedback loop which communicate the extent to which monitoring can occur and how effective it is, and the economics and technical viability of fulfilling certain needs with sustainable options. In short, the private sector becomes the catalyst to change since they provide the litmus test for determining how to better establish linkages between resource use and the environment. The transformation from a conceptual model to actors within this model, and, finally to public, private, and educational roles of influences, is shown below. It is important to recognize that the following models are particularly viable in a city such as Austin due to a relatively high positioning on the sustainability learning curve among the principal players: the City of Austin, local industries and the development community, the school districts, and the area’s universities and colleges. EDUCATION - DISSEMINATION PUBLJC SECTOR PRIVATE SECTOR COMMISSIONS MONITORING CITY STAFF EVALUATION AND USERS BUSINESSES V. From a Participation and Conceptual Model to an Operational Model: Putting Plumbing in the System In analyzing procedures to guide resource use relative to sustainable systems, beginning with the regional environment as the resource base, there develops a sequence in transformation processes from raw resources to use and finally to reuse and recycling. As mentioned earlier in the development of our conceptual and participant models, there are four principal components (energy, water, solid waste, and building material) with three principal actors (the public sector, the private sector, and the education sector.) Together components and actors take part in the sequence involving all resource utilization efforts. • Step One; Sourcing (mining, harvesting, collecting) • Step Two; Transporting and Storing • Step Three: Processing and Manufacturing, Inventorying and Distributing • Step Four; Installing and Using • Step Five: Integrating (with other resource uses) • Step Six: Auditing (benefit/cost analysis) Ideally, there exists a sensing or monitoring mechanism at each synapse throughout the sequence, thus enabling feedback loops to be used as flow indicators. This constant feedback can provide enhanced integration over time. As is indicated in the diagram, the environment is the overall condition within which resources are used; arrows, representing flows between processes, are represented by transportation or actual use procedures; sensors appear at critical junctures between use flows and recycling/re-use feedback loops; finally, people’s resource needs of energy, water, waste, and materials are represented by the sequence of the transformation process (from resource harvesting, mining, lumbering, etc. on through to the process of auditing the results.) Thus, the entire sequence can be simplified into alternating processes and flows.

Page 111

COMMISSION CITY STAFF MONITORING EVALUATION POLICY / PLANNING VI. Operational Model and its Relation to the City of Austin and the Environmental & Conservation Services Department GENERIC WATER ENERGY TRNSPRT TRNSPRT FLOW PIPE . INFORMATION MATERIAL FLOW USE USE USE FLOW INFO. RECLAIM -----------► Auorr INTEGRATE PROCESS INTEGRATE INTEGRATECONVERT RECYCLE SOURCE PROCESS PROCESS PROCESSPROCESS SOURCE SOURCE TREAT It IS extremely important that the conceptual model developed in this project is compatible with programs already underway. Policy is formulated through a flow pattern involving several public sectors, including citizen commissions, city staff, city manager’s office, and, ultimately, city council. City departments monitor different programs in a variety of ways, from general criteria such as total energy, water, or solid waste flow, to more in-depth methods such as pressure doors for weatherization. The private sector, businesses, and users are supported through referral services, rebates, and annual award ceremonies, while the educational community of universities and non-profits provide perspective and expertise. As one can see, the City already encourages participation and exemplary environmental activities through its sponsorship of a number of environmental awards and recognition programs, including the Energy Star Program, Xeriscape Award, Cash for Trade, Clean Builder Award (via Keep Austin Beautiful,) the Annual Environmental Awards. In a sustainable systems sense this reward system sets the stage for the necessary community values regarding the environment and serves as a constant reminder to the public that such programs exist and are valuable. Each of these model examples for different departments is diagrammed below. It is the intention of the Sustainability Rating Program, through the newly-created Green Builder Program, that an overall rating procedure inclusive of sub-programs will become the most sought after award, since it will be indicative of achievement of a more comprehensive nature. This general operational model for the city is diagrammed below, and correlates with our original conceptual model as shown. MATERIAL SOLID WASTE MATERIALS TRNSPRT TRNSPRT MATERIAL USE USE STOREREUSE RECYCLEINTEGRATE TREAT PROCESS SOURCE SOURCE FLOWS RESOURCE BASE LOCAL INDUSTRY SOURCE TRANSPORT PROCESS MANUFACT. INVENTORY DISTRIBUTE INSTALL TRANSPORT STORAGE PROCESS MANUFACT. USE INTEGRATE AUDfT USE INTEGRATE Auorr

Page 112

CO 0 a: UJ Z lU SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS RATING PROGRAM o: LLI I Q O CO LLI BUILDING SYSTEMS EARTH DAY ENVIRONMENTAL AWARDS SUSTAINABLE CITY GUIDELINES FOR AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSERVATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT bUUD WAblb mUMI^c^inN teHlbUAPt ^VlSOm, ROARr SOLID WASlfeSOIL PIANNINC PAWNING FAANAGING MONrrORING AUDfT bNtHUY AUUII WAblb STREAM RAMPI INC THERMAL ANALYSIS pUlLUlNG NSPECTION O 0- Q O 0- bU-UIHIU UTILnY COMMNC^ION BUILDING nANDARDS roMMISSION I- BUILDING iN^FcrnnK VII. How Rating Procedures are Core to the Development of the Relational Field Matrix as an Accounting Procedure There are obviously many different possible technologies representing any one process or flow in the sequence presented earlier. In fact, it is important to realize that any single technique associated with, for example, extraction, is also associated with one or more techniques of tronsport or storage. In other words, under processes (or technologies) that represent extraction, harvesting, or mining, one con associate several procedures with each one. If a topic such as mesquite wood is placed in this sequence, technologies under harvesting or lumbering are narrowed even further. Once one chooses a specific technique at this primary level of the sequence one is faced with a series of transport or storage options. For example, if the wood is logged it indicates one set of transparent means, if it is chipped, another, say, blown through piping to a central power plant instead of being transported solely by truck. One can identify a myriad of techniques even within a given topic such as biomass planting and harvesting under Source. Similarly, these techniques affect the manufacturing or technologies that transform a raw material to a useful form, as with heat or a building brick. To be consistent with our goal of providing continuous linkages to achieve integrated sustainable systems, it is important to have an accounting system that operates throughout the identified sequencing. To do this requires a special kind of matrix format that is relational by nature. In other words, for every intersection in one relationship through our sequence of processes and flows there is a certain relationship or series of relationships through the next sequence of processes and so on. The intent of this procedure is to always show how a decision or choice at one level is reflected in subsequent choices at other levels in the sequence. One way of accomplishing this is called the relational field matrix which has been widely used in accounting procedures for everything from industrialized building to regional land use and ecological planning to the development of the B2 bomber. The important concept is to realize early on in this accounting procedure is that since it is relational, once can begin at any point or matrix intersection throughout the system, and lead to any other point in the sequence. This means the system js totally adaptable to be entered at any point of inquiry. The transformation of the sustainability sequence to individual matrices and then to an interactive field matrix is diagrammed below. Also diagrammed is the phenomenon of multiple entry points. ENVIRONMENT HUMAN USE wW ENVIRONMENT DISPOSE RECYCLE DISPOSE RECYCLE PROCESS MANUFACTURING PROCESS |MANUFACTURING|

Page 113

VIII. The Relational Field Matrix and Its Relationship to Ecological Land Planning Procedures IX. Taking the Conceptual Model to its Limits and the Introduction of Object Oriented Programming In order to respond to ecological constraints, it is important that the field matrix procedure is sufficiently broad based to enable it to be useful beyond the development stages of this rating program. Thus, as has already been indicated, the procedure can establish the ecological constraint issues necessary to develop a particular resource before extraction, harvesting, or lumbering is initiated. This procedure is diagrammed as follows. Actual examples of mapping overlay procedures in each of the four sustainability issues are also indicated by example. 0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • j; F^^X FOR IhUMAN H^LTH…I| SUSTAINABLE REGIONS 1…AGENCY’S i,RUCTURE_, °4 ^J^IkT.ENVIRO.NME.NT, RESOURCE ASSESSMENT RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES INDIGENOUS MATERIALS GROUND & SURFACE WATER SOURCES SOIL QUAUTY FOR FOOD PRODUCTION ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS SLOPES SOILTYPE VEGETATIVE ASSOCIATIONS WILD LIFE HABITAT GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION BOUNDARIES LAND OWNERSHIP NEIGHBORHOODS SCHOOL DISTRICTS CENSUS TRACTS PARK SYSTEMS PRESERVES SUB-WATERSHEDS & WATERSHEDS METABOLIC PROCESSES INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS COMMERCIAL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATIVE ENERGY UTILITIES WASTE UTIUTIES ENERGY WIND SEASONAL ASSESSI.1ENT FOUNDATION SUnABIUTY LAND 0W?<EnSHIP UTIUTY UNES ROAD ACCESS HOLIES WITH surras LE noors WATER CISTERN SUrTABIUTY ra3 REAL COST OF COY WATER NON POTABLE WATER REQUIRE. DEPTH TO GROUND WATER PRECIPfTAnON AIR QUAUTY SLOPE/EROSION CONDmON LAND OWNERSHIP ACCESS TO SOIL NUTRIENT REPLENISHMENT REAL COST GAS/ ELECTRIC UTTUTY EHI GREYWATER SUrTABIUTY ECOLOGCAL ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT TOTAL ABSORPTION CAPACFTY EXISTING SEWER UNES ;inR ■UR GREnVATER LOADING GROUND WATER CONOmON SOIL SUnABILnY The challenge in providing any kind of model for sustainable rating procedures is to grasp the nature of the audiences being addressed. In this instance, the two key sectors are the homebuying public and the development community, comprised of builders, developers, architects, and real estate agents. Although the requirements for these audiences are different, it is important that the methods selected for communication relate the information in a consistent fashion. As the full breath of the rating system was absorbed, the need for the most broad-based communication tool possible emerged as an essential element. For example, it seems that it would be important for a custom home builder or a developer to have a communications tool which conveys equally effectively to different potential audiences - the real estate broker knowledgeable of environmental concerns and a prospective homebuyer who is riot - the particular advantages of the technologies and materials employed in his/ her home. Similarly, it would be a great benefit to a potential homebuyer to evaluate a prospective home with a developer using a rating tool that he/ she was comfortable with, and make suggestions based on options revealed through the rating tool to enhance the home’s sustainability. Ideally, communication of sequential processes is easy enough to understand such that designers, engineers and land planners would be able to use it for mocking up infrastructure for retrofit designs, homes, or developments. Previously, these efforts were almost solely superstructure or shell oriented in their concerns about visual aesthetics, structural integrity, internal spatial planning, or site planning. With the introduction of the sustainable rating system, equal attention would be placed on the plumbing, waste water, energy, solid waste management, utility infrastructure implications, and on the type of materials used. How, then, can this system be actualized in a way that provides not only a method for mock-up and inspirational diagramming, but which also has the necessary depth to carry out engineering and utility load management calculations? The use of illustration art or pictures to describe sequences has a long history that goes back as far as hieroglyphics in ancient Egypt where entire stories were told about a civilization that, otherwise, we would know little about. During World War II, fighter pilots were trained more efficiently through comic strips than in a classroom setting, and so training manuals featuring illustrations by Wait Disney were developed. Furthermore, today there is a major surge in activity in computer programming (Object Oriented Programming, or OOPs) that is likely to dominate the next generation of computer hardware and software, as well as mainstream communication and educational tools of the future. OOPs’ uniqueness results from the breadth of user types to which it can relate. Because everything can be represented in pictures or computer programs, those who are artistically inclined or who relate to systems at a more general level have an equal entry point as those who are more mathematically inclined, while those who require mathematical backup in terms of operational equations can participate at that level. An example of our process and flow sequence is presented here, highlighting several different sustainability sequences covering each of the four resource areas and using identifiable icons which have become standard elements of computer software programs.

Page 114

We propose that an icon, or graphic-driven system become the method through which each sustainability sequence is shared and used. It will be through this graphic base that the public first becomes aware and is able to become famil­ iar with the linkage aspects of the rating program. These icons will eventually become the pallet of tools through which designers, homeowners, engineers, and architects communicate with each other and their respective clientele. Fur­ ther, it will be the basic organizational framework for the City’s files and infor­ mation relating to the program. This will be achieved either through the icon itself, or through a proposed numerical system which will be representative of each icon and icon sequence. We propose that this system also become the basis of educational planning kits and games for students of all ages. SOURCE CONVERT INTEGRATE AUDrr ENERGY FORM NATURAL PROD UANU. BY. PROD. SOURCE FORM CONVERT USE INTEGRATE AUDR BIO-THERMAL X. Sustainable Technology and How the Rating System Works Below we have repeated the icon sequence shown previously along with how they would be rated in parts and in wholes. It is important to realize that a tech­ nology alone can be rated, but more than a single point cannot be gained un­ less one can go to some other level in sequence. It is also important to note that one does not have to go to an adjacent icon in the sequence to earn points. For example, a stove that is manufactured outside of the region but exhibits good airtight combustion design and efficient flue cleaning, etc. might gain points for being a good stove, using local wood cutters, local transporters, and stockpilers, and even for becoming fully integrated into a building with proper weatherization, flue waste heat recovery etc. and auditing. In this instance, the total possible points would be 5 rather than 6. XI. The Importance of Binary Rating in Complex Systems Although the previous diagram showing the generic rating procedure almost seems too simplistic and incapable of providing any meaningful impact on de­ velopment or a city’s sustainable future, one must consider these sequences as basic communication tools to the public. In effect, they are responses to ques­ tions or first order inquiries, beginning at the point of fundamental introduc­ tion into what is an enormously complex system. As we have said, this is done purposely in order to develop the degree of participation needed through easy-to-understand graphic statement sequences. What one must realize is that the actual complexity resulting from thousands of such graphic statement sequences is what makes the whole system work in terms of ultimate ability to have regional impact. SEQUENCE SCORING WHEN REGIOIUAL WOOD SOURCES ARE USED AND MANAGED WHEN STOVE OR FiREPLACES AR- PURCHASED THRU LOCAL DEALERS WHEN INTEGRATION EFFORTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH OTHER RESOURCE ISSUES BIO-THERMAL 8 0 0 (7 9 WHEN WOOD IS FURCHA.SED R’RU LOCAL CUTTERS AND DtSTRiB’JTORS AN AUDrr HAS BEEN TAKEN SHOWING THAT THE FULLEST INTEGRATION POSSIBLE HAS BEEN MET WHEN PROPER INSTALLATION METHODSAND USE HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED INTEGRATION SCORING TOTAL SEQUENCE SCORING

Page 115

XII. The User Type and Their Sphere of Influence It is beneficial at this point to review some actual examples in order to under­ stand the degree to which the rating system works, and the role of conservation within it. For the purposes of our example comparison, we will use the same oc­ cupant number for all conditions, that is, a 2.8 member family. All units contain shower, washing machine, sinks, dishwasher, and toilet. • Example I: Occupants from a multi-family unit or single-family residence situated in a dense urban condition want to participate in the program. They have limited ability to engage in the full sequence because of their limitations imposed by their site. For example, they are without access to land to fully take advantage of greywater reuse and their relationship to the owner of the home that they are leasing approves only some conservation. Under a pure conservation mode (since other opportunities are unavailable) the family can reduce greywater output from a non-conserving, worst case mode from 70,272 gpy to 39,492 gpy, or a 43.8% savings including a water conserving commode. The maximum rating that can be obtained is in optimization in the Use category for each of the five use technologies: showers, washing machine, sinks, dishwasher, and toilet, for a total of 5 points—we gave 6 points by saying that the toilet insert was produced locally. SHOWER EFFI CLOTHES WASHER ISH WASHER POTABLE SINK COMMODE COMMODE Sustainable Rating = 6 Water conservation quantity over non- conserving family with no garden = 43.89% Energy conservation quantity over non- conserving family with no g^en = 5.8 times less energy Valw 5056 5353.5 4551 4343.5 3345 3343.5 2341 2333.5 1333 1333.5 331 • Example II: Occupants from a home with a yard apply typical water conservation practices in the home and yard. While the home remains the same as in Example I, the resident has the choice for connecting to the cities ex­ isting water system and but has the added burden of the yard, though water conservation practices are employed. Since the choice was made for using the existing system and installing good healthy piping there is an added rating of 10 in this category. According to the City of Austin, non- conserving practices in the yard account for 0.62 gallons/sq. ft./ week on average. With a viable Xeriscape landscape in all categories of ground cover, shrubs, and tree type the resulting total water use figure is 0 while a rating of 4 is given in each one of these three areas. Since the three main areas of Xeriscape were employed using in each case indigenous plants, labor, suppliers, proper planting and integration procedures, there is a total of 12 points for the yard, and a total sustainability rating of 5 for the house. Thus, the occupant has saved approximately 13,020 gallons of water over a five month period. The total rating for this building would be 28 points. CITY WATER POTAB. WATER CLOTHES WASHERerr/ WATER POTAB. WATER DISH WASHERCrTY WATER POTAB. WATER POTABLE SINKerrr WATER POTAB. WATER CRY WATER POTAB. WATER RN WAT/CIST POTAB. WATER NTV SHRUB NTV GR CO Sustainable Rating = 28 Water conservation quantity over non- conserving family with high water landscape at 1200 s.f. =55.9% Energy conservation quantity over non- conserving family with high water landscape =11.7 times less energy VaJue sise 5353.5 4151 4345.5 3546 3343.5 2541 2338.5 1838 1333.5 831

Page 116

• Example III: The occupants of a house with a yard go through a sustainable sequence inside the home as well as in the yard, that not only captures various sustainability sequences but also integration efforts between sequences that can each odd a point. The sequences are as follows: First, the household conserves the flow of water in each technical area as in Examples I and II. Second, the shower, washing machine, and non-potable sinks rely on water derived from a roof catchment system that is treated in a cistern with a small ozonation bubbler to maintain water purity. The cistern and guttering were manufactured and installed by a local supplier. A greywater system was manufactured and installed using a local company. After ozonation and U.V. pond treatment, greywater is used for food production. The garden is placed in a passive solar greenhouse for garden and home space heating during inclement seasons. The greenhouse in the summer is used as a screened porch, thus helping provide breeze and shade as well as keeping some insects from the food crops. The integration of a passive solar greenhouse in Texas as a screened breeze porch that helps keep out garden insects is the kind of integration effort that can gain even more points in our rating program. The rating for the entire system uses the base of 28 from the previous example, but adds 9 for the greywater system; 6 for the sink using non-potable water. The total sustainability rating is 29 + 9 + 6 for 43 total points. RN WAT/CIST NON-POT. WTR RN WAT/CIST NON-POT. WTR RN WAT/CIST NON-POT. WTR OTAB. WATER Sustainable Rating = 43 POTABLE SINKerr/ WATER POTAB. WATER NTV SHRUB Value 6000 5400 4800 4200 3600 3000 2400 1800 1200 800 Water conservation quantity over non- conserving family with no garden and water conserving landscape = 75.6% with compost privy = 85.9% Energy conservation quantity over non- conserving family with no garden nor water conserving landscape = 69 times less energy or compared to no energy using compostRN WAT/CIST POTAB. WATER NATIVE CONSG UPP^ CrTY WATER POTAB. WATER COMMODE COMMODE RN WAT/CIST POTAB. WATER NATIVE RN WAT/CIST POTAB. WATER NATIVE XIII. Involving Users, Self Rating, and the Role of Self-Auditing The primary purpose of the program is to catalyze participation and enthusiasm rather than to police participants .into action, or subject them to analytical machines. From the beginning, the rating program was conceived with a positive viewpoint. It would provide the framework for families, businesses, designers, and other community sectors to participate with each other in a challenging process to understand the tremendous breadth of opportunities that Green Building can have in enriching our lives and, as a side benefit, enriching the planet. The challenge to some might be the conceptualization of “Spaceship Earth” at home. To others, it might be creating beautiful, healthy environments, while others may participate to reap investment benefits assuming that a Green Home will have greater value in the future. If icon graphics can successfully engage participants into a greater understanding of what can be an immensely complex undertaking, we believe that a parallel effort should be made towards a self-rating system combined with self auditing. In fact, self rating and self auditing can be one and the same. Below is a HyperCard representation of parts within the graphic sequence that demonstrate the kinds of questions that ore to be asked in an audit / self rating program The use of this format would appear in duplicate form enabling city staff to keep track of information and users and for users to both learn in more depth what icons mean and be able at the same time to audit. Following this audit rating and tracking HyperCard format is an example of an actual rating card with mocked-up icon sequences for the three user scales (living unit, home with yard, neighborhood/development) to show how sequencing and scoring was done. XIV. Involving the Business Community In a sense, the proposed rating system is an economic development tool. It involves the full spectrum of vertical production, from raw material “extractor”, transporter, manufacturer, supplier, user, designer, engineer, integrator, to even professional auditors if that component is ever placed in an actual job category instead of self auditing. The job production multiplier at each level for increases due to the multiplicity of implied uses and use conditions. But for the homeowner, builder, and developer, the advantages lie in the ability to take advantage of a trend towards environmentally sound living. According to recent polls published in Builder Magazine (July 1991), seventy-nine percent of the United States population consider themselves environmentalists; seventy-eight percent support a major national effort to improve the environment; seventy-six percent want businesses to do more; and seventy-nine percent of the population would pay up to twenty percent more for an environmentally-safe product.

Page 117

BIOMASS !i& inoQurri COD AR QUANTTrY AVAILABLE SELF CUT LOCATIONS HABTTAT VALUE FUEL VALUE BIOMASS A LOGS HAULERS DISTRIBUTORS /PELLETS STORAGE ISSUES presseJ LOOS The fact is that the American dream of a single-family home with a yard, or of a planned development with open space and tightly planned multi-use activities are ideal sustainability candidates as the trend in the earlier examples illustrate. These examples offer the highest integration potential since there is a greater opportunity for integration with the larger environment. Again, national buyer statistics bear out these two models of development. On the one hand, without planned, multi-unit sites (without walking distance amenities), seventy-five percent of homeowners still desire large lot zoning. However, when given the option (when amenities are planned and diverse, town-like land use features are brought together,) thirty-four percent of those polled want small town atmosphere, while only twenty-four percent would choose suburbs, twenty-two percent farms, and nineteen percent cities. (Source: 1989 Gallup Poll) XV. Sustainability Guidelines and Rating for Developments The user’s sphere of influence on the environment relates to the scale at which the user works. In Example I in Section XII above, the user’s ability to participate on several levels of sustainability rating reflected their limited control of their environment. It became obvious in Example II, featuring a single-family home with a yard, that the change in living circumstances enhanced the capacity to participate in, and be rewarded through, the sustainability rating. Factors other than sphere of influence enter into the picture, such as the fact that the ratio of tenants to homeowners in Austin is fifty-two percent to forty- eight percent respectively. Thus, a majority of Austin’s population if enormously limited in their ability to assume major decisions concerning the sustainability of their residence. In this sense, it is easy to absorb the magnitude of decisions made by the development community as they plan multi-family complexes and subdivisions dominated by rental units. Their participation in the Green Builder program could be the most important involvement in tangible benefits than any other sector individually. However, the approach in many sequences in any of the category areas that a developer could take is obviously at a different scale than for an individual homeowner. What was a greywater landscape for a homeowner is now a waste metabolizing wetland for a developer. What was an integrated heat pump HVAC system coupled with a water heating system for a homeowner is now a district heating/cooling/water heating system for the developer. Therefore, for each icon sequence, there is an implied scale that relates better to one user type than to another. This recognition of scale also aids to ensure that not only should there be icon sequence reference guides, but also parallel guides that cover different scales. This condition of scale is diagrammed to the right in a way that demonstrates the levels through the sequence that one would expect of the different user types. Because some sequences relate better at different scales an example of a sequence theme for grey water reduction/reuse according to the same scales of living unit, home with yard, and neighborhood/development are shown DEFINITION OF SCALE USING BIO-THERMAL EXAMPLE LIVING UNrr HOME wnn YARD NEIGHBORHOOD / DEVELOPMENT

Page 118

XVI. Icon Definition, Principal Icon Sequences, and Sequences Relative to Matrices Below are two icon sequences with appropriate definitions, both relevant to the homeowner scale. The process of defining iconography is an important task if they are to become a major element in the overall rating system. A catalog of icons would be divided into families under each of the four topic headings. These families would be derived from main topic headings under each sequence. By using both drawn graphic symbols and color differentiations between sequence types, the user would be able to clearly distinguish the various sequences and topics. Examples of icon definitions can be seen below. XVII. Operating a Sustainable System Based on High Levels of User Participation User participation is the key to making icon-based sustainability a reality. The better the user participation, the more likely it .is for market demand forces to fall in to place to support the businesses and products that relate to the community’s overall sustainability needs, and for the city to track (monitor) the effectiveness of previous actions. This feedback loop is continuous; therefore, the emphasis constantly changes resulting in slightly different scenarios over time. If, for example, certain previously unknown issues relating to water were to require attention, the program would provide a method through which the city could alert the public, through the media and other public information outlets, of appropriate responses over a certain time period. Such a method is currently used in cases of severe water or energy shortages. Essentially, the city’s method to communicate overall resource and environmental conditions to the public, resulting from efficient monitoring and other feedback mechanisms, is through the use of sustainability themes that become familiar symbols in various local media, and are supported by reward systems. The program’s ability to successfully respond to evolving ecological patterns relies on a consistent communication language shared between the city, program users. This model emphasizes the need to develop such a communication tool at multiple levels, without undermining its basic commitment to the rules of sustainability. The diagram to the left expresses the operational aspects of the program. Finally, as seen below, we include graphic representations of icon sequences from a simple living unit to one of full scale sustainability in abstract graphic form only in order to demonstrate the extent to which graphics alone can show the process. SOLID WASTE ICON IDENTIFICATION: SOAKER HOSE ENERGY ICON IDENTIFICATION: WOOD BIOMASS TIRE SOURCES: HOME GARAGES, GAS STATIONS, RECYCLERS, LANDFILLS THOSE BUSINESSES WHO TRANSPORT AND STORE TIRES REGIONALLY REGIONAL BUSINESSES WHO RE-PROCESS, RE- MANUFACTURE, INVENTORY, AND RE-DISTRIBUTE OLD TIRES (IN THIS CASE, AS A SOAKER HOSE) ANY PROCESS USING SOAKER HOSE IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY WAY WHEN SOAKER HOSE IS USED IN AN INTEGRATED APPROACH WrrH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES SUCH AS BURYING FT BELOW A GARDEN THAT USES ORGANIC COMPOST AND SOIL WHEN THE USER HAS AUDITED (CHECKED INTO) ANY POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECTS OF USING TIRES, IF POSSIBLE, INCORPORATTNG ACCEPTED TESTTNG PROCEDURES FOR TOXINS, ETC. TRANSPORT BY CUTTERS, STORERS, AND SUPPLIERS OF REGIONAL WOOD SPECIES IN VARIOUS PHYSICAL FORMS SUCH AS LOGS, PELLETS, AND PRESSED LOGS ACTUAL STOVE OR FIREPLACE USE DEMONSTRATING PROPER INSTALLATION AND OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR MAXIMUM EFFICIENCIES EFFECT OF STEPS ONE THROUGH FIVE ON EACH OTHER AND THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH SELF AUDITING OR OFFICIAL AUDITING PROCEDURES RAW MATERIAL SOURCE FOR REGIONAL WOOD SPECIES SHOWING PLACE OF ORIGIN AND QUANTITY REGIONAL STOVE MANUFACTURERS, SUPPLIES, MASONS, INSTALLERS INTEGRATION INTO ENERGY OR RESOURCE NEEDS OF HOME USING REGIONAL STOVE AND MASONRY FIREPLACE DESIGNERS, ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS

Page 119

ATTACHED UNIT ENERGY EN-BM -1 ENERGY WATER SOLID WASTE ENERGY MATERIALS ENERGY DEMAND WATER DEMAND RESOURCE USE DATA BASE SOLID WASTE DEMAND MATERIALS DEMAND EN - SHW - 2 WA-C- SW-T- EN-C-2 MA-SG - 2 THEME DEVELOPMENT (according to resource database) MARKETING (media use. business participation according to theme requirements) REWARD SYSTEM (user, developer, all loan based plaques CONSTITUENT DEVELOPMENT NEWSPAPFRS TELEVISION =1 Pcihunk: mau HAUK. POS TAL- ShUVICb OP HOME WITH YARD ENERGY ENERGY WATER ENERGY MATERIALS NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT WA-C-1 SOUD WASTE EN-BM - 1 EN - SHW - 2 MA-SG- 2 EN-C-2 0 EN -BM-1ENERGY ENERGY WATER ENERGY MATERIALS EN - SHW - 2 WA-i EN-C-2 SOUD WASTE SW SCORING EXAMPLE ENERGY ENERGY MATERIAL s EN -BM-1 EN- SHW-2 SOUD WASTE ENERGY WA-i SW-T-4 WATER lotai Score 25

Page 120

1993 CLIENT: American Institute of Architects FUNDING: American Institute of Architects; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; AIA Committee on the Environment In 1991, Bob Berkebile asked Pliny to join the AlA’s Committee on the Environment. Over a two-year tenure on the Committee, Pliny became deeply involved in developing the framework for the Environmental Resource Guide (ERG), a groundbreaking effort to create a methodology to assess the environmental impact of building materials. As Co-Chair of the ERG Committee, Pliny was instrumental in establishing life cycle as the underlying framework for materials assessment. AIA ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE GUIDE ©

Page 121

Establishing an Organizational Rationale for the AlAs Environmental Resource Guide (1993) The AlA’s Significant initiative, The Environmental Resource Guide (ERG), acknowledges for the first time the use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methods in mainstream architectural practice. In so doing, the architectural profession in the United States is joining a global initiative to track and understand human impact on the biosphere. It is believed that the fundamental essence of viewing the built environment as a cyclical process from a material perspective, and as a negentropic process from an energy perspective, has vast ramifications in all areas of design. Moreover, this expanded understanding could establish a rich basis to redirect the profession towards a consciousness, understanding and application of sustainable design principles. As with other disciplines, the architectural profession has to a certain extent grown into itself. Architecture, instead, needs to become a true partner and even a leader whose tentacles become intertwined with the myriad disciplines necessary to establish the only rational future—that of a sustainable world.

Page 122

Who is Our Client? I believe that our client is more than who we think it is. According to the July 1991 issue of Builder Magazine published by the National Association of Home Builders, “The Green Movement is not a fad but a sea of change. …a broad-based and eminently sensible social trend… (that) could offer new housing another layer of advantages over resale competition. The statistics are compelling: 79% of Americans consider themselves environmentalists; 78% want a major national effort to improve the environment; 76% want businesses to do more; and, among those considered environmentally aware, research shows a willingness to pay up to 20% more for environmentally safe products.” Our allied professional organizations, including ASLA, ASID, and ASTM, have significant efforts underway that point to a similar direction. EPAs continued support of the Environmental Resource Guide, with the help of the Department of Energy, tells us the doors are opening. The ERG’s clientele includes therefore the following: we as professionals, our own clients, our allied professions, and professions we have never really dealt with before in any direct sense as partners on the job. In addition, the AIA has an ongoing commitment to education, as expressed by the education committee for many years. Just to make sure we include both existing and possible partners, the following partial list is included: Present Possible architects interior designers architecture schools contractors / builders (NAHB) landscape architects urban designers mechanical engineers structural engineers lighting engineers indoor air quality experts city libraries educators clients land use planners developers planning agencies city conservation departments WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Designing for a sustainable world is an integrative procedure. Too many of our tools, however, force us to think and work in a linear fashion As a good example, CSI, the Construction Specifications Institute, just placed sustainable architecture into its index system. Sustainable architecture now has a number and is considered one possibility of many under the CSI catch-all category 13000, However, sustainable architectural design is not any particular part of architecture, nor is it a category or an element. Sustainable design deals as much with all energy as it does all material issues in building (including air, water, soil, solid waste, waste water). It deals with the design and engineering of water systems, waste water systems, communications, transportation, landscaping, urban planning, site preparation. It is a procedure and a method of design. Right now, it provides a conceptual framework to get the built environment back on track so that the earthly delights around us will continue to be with us and with future generations. The fact is, however, there is no methodology for sustainable design. The ERG provides a perfect place to introduce what the methodology should be. If we critique our thinking habits as being archaic and linear, then what is a non-linear process? A non-linear process is life with all the feedback loops built in that enables life to continue. Linear thinking excludes feedback loops. It makes believe that the world is predictable in the way that we have planned it to happen. Can our world survive by being so highly specialized that we must take the car to the kids’ baseball game two blocks away since there is no sidewalk or path to walk there? My son must wait for me to have the time to take him to the game. The car, by default, becomes the only option. Conversely, life has many options built into it, and many paths can be taken if the right tools are supplied. It is essential that these options have enough flexibility to prevent the potentially disastrous consequences associated with going down a one- way path, HOW DO WE BUILD OPTIONS INTO ARCHITECTURE? The most simplistic answer is to mimic nature, follow her rules. There are at least four rules that are the survival tools of natural systems: 1, Natural systems are highly redundant: one system seems always to be duplicated at a scale larger and smaller than the system being addressed, 2, Conservation of resources (energy and materials) seems to occur through the integration of highly connected components that often serve multiple functions, 3, Nature limits, whenever possible, the number of conversion steps AND the distance between these steps and tends to accomplish all needs at the smallest possible scale, 4, All the actors in every living system function in a way to ensure a continuous life cycle of materials. Now what do these rules have to do with architecture and the ERG? Redundancy can occur within the design at almost any project scale. Recently we analyzed a 500,000 square foot office building in downtown Austin, Texas and found that it could capture enough rainwater to supply 94% of its total water needs thus providing a basis to rethink centralized water distribution systems and their high installation, maintenance and operational costs. The problem is the unrealistically low cost of water even in a place like Texas and the amount of subsidy incurred by the taxpayer and long term bonds. The point is that with careful design we can relook at our skewed economics. We need to offer design solutions to at least partially duplicate at smaller scales what we have forced into occurring only at larger scales in as many areas of life support as possible on all projects. Can the ERG show a variety of scales in every life support system it promotes and provide economic justification examples to support it? Integration is the kind of design rule that has always been implicit, but has had little formal backup. What occurs when only one task is accomplished with a single design element is that a project can quickly become cost prohibitive. For example, if an alternative wastewater treatment system enables one to build in a place that had been technically impossible to build on using other techniques, the first question to ask is whether the new technology is accomplishing multiple benefits to humans and the environment (i,e, something the environment can use). The second question to ask is whether there is a strategy that can make it cost-effective from a multiple-use standpoint. But perhaps the most important question is whether to build there in the first place from the standpoint of

Page 123

long term human or environmental impact. Recently we designed an interior wetland for a California home. In addition to treating the homes waste water, the installation provides a lush landscape during very cold winter months, which otherwise would have been cost prohibitive. As a side benefit the system also purifies the air. One system, three functions: waste water treatment, an interior landscape, and an air purifier. In our Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home for the State of Texas, we are creating a landscape with a rock reed flower bed 40 feet in total length, a living fence, a low pressure dosage lawn, and an orchard. To have installed these plants only for landscaping would have exceeded the project’s budgetary parameters but instead are absorbed in the cost of wastewater treatment. Conversion steps and distance are perhaps the two most frequently overlooked sustainability issues. Our food system places a single food item on a 1300 mile journey before arriving on a plate. This cannot be perpetuated. Similarly, waste water treatment cannot be efficient when hundreds of miles of pipe and pumping stations are required to accomplish what nature can do in the backyard. The greatest user of embodied energy in the construction industry is the highway sector (16.44% of total construction), followed not too far behind by the construction of single family homes (12.39% of total construction). If one analyzes all energy use on a construction site, one of the largest energy users is bringing crew and materials to the site (approximately 23% in northern climates and higher in southern). There are many examples that support this view of transportation. One, of course, that is well known is to emphasize pedestrian means of travel but there are others. A building’s operational energy budget over both short and long terms could be dramatically curbed by instituting teleconferencing. As a study done by AT&T and the State of Arizona showed, if only 1% of all employees of companies with 100 employees or more in a single county in Arizona telecommutes only one day per week, the following benefits would occur. • 9.4 million miles not driven • reduction of 185 tons of vehicular related pollutants • 463,000 gallons of gasoline left unburned Next is the question of the number of conversion steps between source and use. The difference in efficiency, for example, between three and seven conversion processes in any particular life cycle is the arithmetic product of the number of steps, or .34 and .08 (assuming a given efficiency), more than four­ fold difference. This type of quantitative analysis provides a basis to promote integrated community planning, in which such things as local production, direct buying, and other community enterprises become overarching community goals. Finally, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is too often viewed as an analytical process. For all intents and purposes, it is impossible for the LCA to become part of everyday procedures. However, the fact is that the source to sink or, more appropriately stated, the birth to rebirth approach, is a fundamental procedure to conceptualize almost any activity. To limit LCA to materials only is falling into the trap of linear thinking, in which all other subject matter is a special case and must be dealt with differently and with different tools. If the word “assessment” is replaced by “stages within the life cycles” of energy, water, light, and any other life support issue, and adapt to scale change, then the analytical world becomes tolerable to the architect. For instance, by thinking of light as having a source, transport, conversion, and use, light becomes a more understandable concept since we can think of it within a structure that parallels how we would track a material, energy, water etc.. DEVELOPING AN ORGANIZATION FORMAT AND USE PROCEDURE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE GUIDE Several working models exist that organize professional publications to facilitate their use. Few, however, have tried to introduce a design methodology or evaluate how an office may be set up to better accomplish specific goals. To our knowledge, no attempts have been made to do this based on sustainable design principles. So, what is about to be discussed could be more than we want to get into, but my own viewpoint is that “we are about to enter the 21st century folks, so let’s give it a whirl.” To start with, let’s go back to some of those older attempts. By far the most well known is Ekistics out of Athens, Greece, Doxiodos’ publication that is now some 30 years old. In that publication, every issue and every article was categorized according to a format that cross-related 15 scales of the building domain, from anthropos to ecumenopolis (the global village), with five of what were called elements (nature, anthropos, society, shells, and networks). Without spending time going too deeply into this format, some examples are supplied below. COMMUNTTY SCALE EKISTTC UNFTS ^.NETWORKS SYNTHESIS: .HUMAN SETTLEMENTS a: O co I 2 ( 0ANTHROPOS co CURRENT SOCIAL ANO ECONOMIC INDICATORS HOUSING, TECHNOLOGY, COMMUNFTY ORGANIZATION, EKISTICS NETWORKS LEARNING ABOUT SETTLEMENTS AND ENERGY HOUSING, URBAN DESIGN. ENERGY, CULTURE, RESEARCH, HISTORY WORLD GENERAL

Page 124

Another less well known, but more thoroughly explored format, was put together by Industrialized Forum, a journal produced in the early 70’s during the hallmark years of the industrialized building industry. This was a combined effort by the National Research Council of Canada and several foreign governments, professional societies and schools of architecture, including the U.S. (e.g. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, MIT and Washington University). As with Ekistics, each issue of Industrialized Forum provided an indexing system, in which the information was purposely relationally related in as close as one could get during that period to a HyperCard™ type retrieval. An example of this information system appears below. HOW TO USE THE “INDUSTRIALIZATION FORUM” INTEGRAL INFORMATION SYSTEM. STORAGE: (read down) RETRIEVAL, (read up) Article in IF. I. .D0 you use the IF accession numbers (A)? Il not. enter your own filing sys­ tem numbers in the two spaces pro­ vided (B); II. Place the article in your tile or on your shelf in a position described uni­ quely by the number; IF numbers (A) are used in ascending numerical order (gaps in the numbers represent reser­ ved spaces for other documents, see step V below): if your numbers are used your own system rules will apply. Abstract Cards Provided by IF. III. Do you use the IF accession numbers (A’)? Il not. enter your own filing sys­ tem number in the space provided (BT be sure to use the same number lor IF articles (B) and the abstract cards re- lerring to them (B”); IV. Il you possess the original document (necessarily the case with IF articles), check the “on hand” box (G): if not. check the “not on hand” box: if you know where the document can be con- suited. (e.g. in the local library) enter the appropriate indications in the space provided: E !B Artidu in IF. The lead page ol each anida contains all Iha informaltan required lor its proper entry into end retrieve! from the system. Retrieve the original document from V. your file or shelf (locations described uniquely by A or B). or obtain it from the most convenient local source or from the publisher. A z IF accession numbers, common to both articles and the correspond­ ing abstract cards; B = space to enter alternative num­ bers: C z keywords corresponding to impor­ tant concepts in the articles: D = abstract, also reproduced on the corresponding abstract card; E = author’s biographicsl note; F = Stan of the text. V. Il you decide to order the document, refer to the information on the back of the card (“Available from:’ and “Price:”); upon receipt, check “on hand” and gh,e the document the same accession number as the abstract card (A’ or B°) and file it on the shelf in the space ready for it (see step II above); VI. Place the abstract card in a card file; if IF numbers are used (AI. the cards will be-filed in continuously ascending numerical order. Keyword Cards Provided by IF. VII.Take out the cards with the keywords (C”) corresponding to each of the key­ words on one abstract card (C’); if it is a new keyword, enter the word on a blank card; if you do not have a card, order some blanks from IF. In all cases, enter the word orvihe top left hand comer of the card. VIII. Enter the accession number (A” or B”) identical to the number found on the abstract card; write it in the column which bears the same number at the lop as the last digit of the accession number (for example. 2129 would be entered in the top available space un­ der the 9 ); if you use the IF numbers (A’), the list on page 2 of this issue is a great help, and it is probably quicker to enter all the IF numbers on each of the corresponding keyword cards at once rather than abstract by abstract; tX. Place the keyword cards in a card file in alphabetical order. Abstract Cards Provided by IF. The abstract cards act as guides for informetion storage and retrieval, and provide quick information about the documents. A’ z IF accession numbers; B’ = space to enter alternative num­ bers; C = concepts corresponding to im­ portant concepts in the original document: D’ = abstract, usually in three parts: (i) indicative, (ii) informative and (in) addhional notes: also availa­ bility and price are given; G = space to indicate where the do­ cument can be found. 77X feerwcid card, arc the operctive part of the rynem. Plank keyvrcid cardi can be obtained from IF. fine the order form feting die table of contentU. A” = space where IF accession num­ bers are entered; B” = space where your system num­ bers are entered; C” = keyword. Go to the abstract card file and take IV. out the cards bearing the correspond­ ing numbers (A’ or B’); scan the key­ word list (CT and the abstract (D’) to confirm relevance: ascertain (from entries G) whether you possess the original document or whether you wish to obtain it and how; Compare the keyword cards for corn- III. mon accession numbers (A” or B”): this is made easier (i) by scanning the columns vertically and (ii) by start­ ing with the numbers on the card with the fewest entries; common numbers are the accession numbers of the do­ cuments which include all those con­ cepts; if no number is common, elimi­ nate the least important concept and corresponding keyword card; if too many numbers are common, add a further keyword to orient your query more exactly; Corresponding keyword cards (C”) are II. selected from the alphabetical file; if no card exists for any of the keywords, this means that you do not have an abstract of a document containing that concept in your files yet; Formulate the subject of your query I. clearly in natural language: select ep- propriate keywords from the the­ saurus (hthat best express the principal concepts in your query; usually 4 or 5 keywords will be chosen; •use order form facing table of contents.

Page 125

In certain ways, the ERG reflects these efforts: a loose leaf binder ready for personal filing and a mixture of good general-to-technical information concerning any given topic. Today, however, the opportunity to evolve the ERG as an organizational tool has greatly improved. For example, the 15 Ekistic categories can become more universally accepted data sets and biogeographic boundaries. Specific organizations can be used as technical support associated with many of these boundaries scales, according to the specific topic being addressed. In our version (below) we come up with 16 categories that serve as identifiable scales. Now we must determine what sustainability topics would be addressed and how they coincide with accepted architectural practice. The path I am suggesting consists of ten topic areas that cover all sustainability issues. Over time, these would have much more detailed content explained. The topics would be cross- related to Master format categories, but placed in a sequence that relates more to the sustainable design process from concept development to infrastructure issues. This would result, for example, in shifting some of the first sections that have limited impact on this process. These categories would be cross-related to thel6 scales above. Together, they would supply the context that every article (theoretical, technical or built) would be categorized under. Sustainability topics would then relate to the life cycle stage that each of these areas deal with. The purpose is to match each one of the 16 scales within formation on that topic and to show the extent to which work has been accomplished on a technical basis with life cycle assessment. F INFORMATION CATAG0RIZATK)N SCALE OF ACTIVITY 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 CONTEXT 0 GO CO E co A GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ANALYTOC MODELS B SITE PLANNING, SrrnNG. -LANDSCAPING,_______________ c ENERGY SYSTEMS RENEWABLE. NONRENEWABLE pteTERJALS, STRUCTURE 4hEU, FACIA E WINDOWS, DOORS. NATURAL UGHnNG rM,ECHANlCAUtfEATlNGt° r COOLING, NENTILATION C CONVEYING, TRANS- ° PORT SYSTEMS „EIECRIC DISTRJBUTtOM, COM ” MUNICAWNS,CONTROL SYS .INTERIOR ANISHES, 1FURNITURE, PAINT —water.wasteWate^ J SOLID WASTE O] 5Z d I 3 ERG C ENERGY SYSTEMS ELECRIC DISnUBUnON.COM 16000 CONTENT 13000 03000-13000 14000 LIFE CYCLE STAGE co UJ co UJ Q MATERIALS. STRUCTURE. SI [ELL FACIA ____________ STTE PLANNING. SrmNG. LANDSCAPING.__________ MASTERFORMAT CSI DCOEX OMSTONS 13000 09000 12000 11000 01000 02000 13000 WINDOWS, DOORS. NATURAL UOHTING II.ECHAMCAU HEATING, COOUNO. NENTILATON CONVEYIHO. TRANS. PORT SYSTEMS ________ BniNICATTONS/TONTROL SYS INTERTOR FIMSHES. FURNITURE. PAINT WATEA.WASTEWATER, SCUD WASTE

Page 126

Scale of activity and life cycle stage are the two essential ingredients to understand and use the proposed ERG re-organization. All information concerning processes or products can first be associated to a scale or scales of activity, and these scales (from the actual chemical element through to the home and finally to the city, region and biome), along with the particular sustainability topic, become a quick referencing base. Three articles from past ERG supplements will serve to illustrate:

1. On-Site Wastewater Treatment: Septic System Design and Alternatives
2. Preventing Non-point Source Pollution: Controlling Urban Runoff
3. Resort Development in Partnership with Nature would be categorized as seen to the right. The reader will note that our Life Cycle sequence is slightly different than that accepted by the present ERG as developed by EPA and the Research Triangle Institute. Both the method proposed and the ERG use six steps, however, step three in the proposed method lumps processing, manufacturing and packing together while placing transportation in the second step (as diagrammed below). There are two reasons for this: first different groups (i.e. SETAC, EPA) choose different sequences for the LCA depending on their goals while still retaining identical overall end results, second; from a regional planning standpoint there are usually at least two distinct transport phases in the life cycle of any product and they appear often in regional analysis.

SUSTAINABILITY TOPIC J B A,B,C,D,F,J SCALE OF ACTIVITY 12 6-12 11 LIFE CYCLE PHASE P T,P, S,T,P,D,U,R, SETAC LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY ENERGY RAW MATERIALS SYSTEM BOUNDARY RAW MATERIALSL AQUISmONv EXISTING ERG MANUFACTURING PROCESSING FORMULATION DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSPORTATION’ WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE USE REUSE MAINTENANCE RECYCLE AIRBORNE EMISSIONS OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES USABLE PRODUCTS ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY WATER EFFLUENTS WASTE WASTE WASTE DISTRIBURON ENERGY WASTE ENERGY ENERGY WASTE DISPOSE RECYCLE REUSE MANUFACTURING PROCESSING RAW MATERIALS AOUISmON USE OR CONSUMPTION MANUFACTURE AND PACKAGING PROPOSED ERG ENERGYENERGY SOURCE ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY USE ENERGY REGIONAL TRANSPORT DISPOSE RECYCLE REUSE PROCESS MANUFACTURE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION WASTE WASTE WASTE WASTE WASTE WASTE

Page 127

ERG SCALE OF ACTIVITY | TOPIC CONTEXT 5 ERG REPORT 111 DATA ORGANIZING STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL INCLUDING THE ERG ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS LOCAL TO NATIONAL TOPIC BY TOPIC CLIENT AND EDUCATION TOOLS FROM GENERAL TO SPECIFIC AND FROM SMALL TO LARGE SCALE MODELING PROCEDURES FROM ENERGY TO WASTEWATER AND FROM LIGHTING TO MATERIALS USING THE SAME PROCEDURAL FORMAT THE SUSTAINABLE OFFICE USING ELECTRONIC VS PAPER STORAGE, TELECOMMUTING VS THE HIGHWAY, AND DISPLAY SYSTEMS RELEVANT TO REGIONAL SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA

Page 128

1995 CLIENT: Montana State University; BNIM Architects FUNDING: Montana State University; National Institute of Standards and Technology PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III, Gail Vittori MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY EPICENTER: THE EIGHT PRINCIPLES

Page 129

Creahng a Decision Support System for Life Cycle Analysis (1995) Life Cycle Design (LCD) establishes a design process which begins at the buildings point of conception, and continues to its final disposition. The N1ST Building, located at Montana State University in Bozeman, Montana highlights the importance of working knowledgeably with a region’s resource base (virgin and by- products), and with a regions labor skills and businesses. In combination, these resources are integral to sustaining a region’s environment and economy. This approach provides scientific and logical evidence to support the assertion that a region can best be sustained by regionalizing its resource dependencies rather than be guided by conclusions drawn from national and even international life cycle analyses. The Decision Support System (DSS) presented will cause a substantial shift in understanding building systems in general, and, more specifically, a shift in understanding the importance of both human and natural resource use. In the Life Cycle Design approach, the procedure of Life Cycle Costing (LCC) becomes a subset of Life Cycle Economics. This procedure assumes that regional economics and ecological sustainability are the primary economic activities to which LCC is compared. These methods, together referred to as Life Cycle Design, purposely evaluate the catalytic actions promoted by the built environment to produce more responsible regional flows on the part of human activities relative to existing ecological parameters in the short and long terms Assessing the impacts of any building subsystem (e.g. building material, energy system, water and wastewater system) from a life cycle perspective (a flow from source to re-source) and the total impacts that each stage has on the internal and external environment is referred to as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Life Cycle Design uses the knowledge gleaned from LCA and Life Cycle Economics (LCE)‘to compare options and choose a solution set that meets resource objectives in a manner that is culturally and scientifically appropriate. LCD is based on several fundamental principles, as follows: Principle #1: Recognize and incorporate self similarity and redundancy among living systems into the built environment. This phenomenon is most easily understood through the duplication of structure and function at many scales, i.e. biomes and watershed systems. Principle #2; Promote the miniaturization of the life cycle including energy, materials, and water starting with the building and site, progressing only to larger scales of life cycle use as is necessary. Principle #3: The production stage within the life cycle can only compete with more centralized larger scales if it becomes multipurpose and/or highly integrated. Principle#4: Reducing the complexity of the life cycle enables it to relate more directly to the amount of information processable by all actors involved, from design and engineering integration to users and environmental impact. Principle#5: Plan for an extended use phase of a building’s life cycle through the separation of structure and shell and the admission of unpredictability in spatial dynamics. Principle#6: Support regionalized economic loops by respecting tight knit life cycle integration. Each stage of the life cycle becomes a part of a region’s economics. Principle *7: Create regionally relevant benchmarks through benchmark comparisons from similar environmental, technological and cultural conditions. Principle #8: Link what are normally disparate databases regarding individual topics (e.g. regional economic vs. a building’s life cycles) into a Life Cycle Design framework for decision making.

Page 130

The following sections describe each principle more fully and link each to approaches used for the NIST Incubator project. It is assumed that a second phase of this work would enable more complete and measurable understanding of the findings at this point in the initial Life Cycle Design process. Principle #1 Recognizeand incorporate the natural tendency of self similarity and redundancy among all living systems in to the built environment. This phenomenon is most easily understood through the duplication of structure and function at many scales, i.e. biomes, watersheds. This principle also states that priority should be placed on providing for the incorporation of all possible processes (or transformations) at the smallest possible scale thus relieving the burden of impact necessitated by the sole use of larger systems. Principal #1 also recognizes the principal of scales that contain processes and that are definable with boundaries. These boundaries are critical for the understanding of performance (or totality of life support needs provided) before one investigates the next boundary. The profound meaning of understanding boundaries is the essence of Life Cycle Planning and sustainably built environment. The intricacies of these scales, types, and relationships are addressed in other papers. If the reader wishes more familiarity with this concept, please contact this author. “Enhancing the Credibility of Ecology: Interacting Along and Across Hierarchical Scales,” di Castri, Francesco, Dr., GeoJournal, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988. The NIST building provides much of its own renewably based energy for heating and cooling, its own waste water treatment, much of its own water. Principle #2 Increasing efficiency through miniaturization of the life cycle within a regional or site context. This principle also requires the recognition of the Life Cycle sequence as a fundamental planning tool and that the processes within each life cycle overlap or serve in a multi-functional manner into another life cycle as described in Principle #1. The efficiency of life cycle process rises when fewer individual or separate transformations occur. This efficiency increase has been demonstrated in both the energy and wastewater fields. See Ayers, Robert, “Industrial Metabolism”, in Technology and Environment, National Academy Press 1989. In the final report to NIST the sequences of life cycles assumed below would be compared to more conventional life cycle sequences and their boundaries. The objective of Principle #1 is to only develop alternative life cycle scenarios that technically exist or are close to commercialization. The examples used on the building illustrate in a brief format the life cycle used and the system it replaces. The NIST facility accomplishes the miniaturization principle through the utilization of on-site resources first. The various life cycle types incorporated can be generically summarized by types 2, 5, 6 and 7. These types represent a departure from the normally disparate life cycle functions and affect the design in profound ways. For example, the on-site sourcing of energy, using the plentiful winter sun in Bozeman, spawns a number of design features as does the on- site availability of ground water and potential for wastewater using closed containment approaches and natural plant treatment indoors. The on-site or local sources required by these technologies can be spatially mapped, and appear at the scale of site, city, region and state boundaries. When a need is unable to be satisfied at one scale, the next larger scale takes effect. At a next step, life cycle boundary alternatives would be inter-compared with other life cycle boundaries to understand total effects. The impact procedure will occur later in our process when a full assessment of life cycle environmental impacts is done. Major material types in the NIST Project, other than some plant materials for landscaping, are all sourced off-site but within the city, region, state or multi­ state area. PRIORTTY site city region state re-source use distribute process transport source number of processes ‘1 ‘N’ 48% 34% 24% 70% 17% relative efficiency 100%

Page 131

Principle #3 The technology of production and use at smaller scales can only compete with those at more centralized larger scales if they become multipurpose and highly integrated. There is a common belief that larger scale, centralized technologies are more efficient and environmentally superior to smaller scale operations due to effective centralized pollution control. However, trends show that with improved technology and enhanced integration between technologies, there is a greater possibility to achieve a balance in material and energy flows at all phases of the life cycle. Simply stated, integration is a more important concept in life cycle design than is conservation. LIFE CYCLE TYPE type 1 when all life cycle stages are geo­ graphically separated type 2 when sourcing alone occurs on site but all other life cycle steps except use are remote type 3 when processing occurs at the source (ie. portable lumber mill) type 4 type 5 @O@IOO by combining transport and distribution into a singular regional activity when processing or manufacturing occur at point of use (ie. site built roof trusses) type 6 when source transport process manufacturing occur at point of use (ie. pressed soil block) type 7 when all processes occur on site including the re-use of product (ie. interlocking pressed soil block) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RELATTVE EFFICIENCY AND efficiency and impact HIGH campus facility and thus normally its use would dominate the designers thinking but the amenities mentioned would not occur. Integrating purified wastewater with other site requirements, such as making sure the ground water level is up in the summer to enable the radiant cooling system to operate properly is an example of micro integration at the site level. Similar comparisons can occur between material LCD. For example, in a passive solar building, materials are as important for structural integrity as they are for mass. Similarly, cisterns can fulfill the dual functions of heat sink and water storage. Principle #4 Reduce the complexity of the life cycle enables it to relate more directly to the amount of information process able by all actors involved, from design and engineering integration to users and environmental impact assessment. Working with simplified construction and mechanical systems aids both in information gathering and processing for environmental impact evaluation, and the ability to integrate one technology with another. The following graph summarizes the information and complexity issue: HIGH size of technology LARGE At the NIST facility the most obvious applications of Principle #2 are the passive solar design features combined with material applications, where sourcing, (production), transport, processing, use and re-use or re-sourcing all occur within the confines of the building or site itself. If energy issues were treated separately, i.e. as a mechanical system divorced from the structure, neither the economics nor the efficiency would occur. Future LCD work on the building can develop a complete comparison at this scale, made by comparing a true cost accounting between energy types. In a similar manner, cisterns and on-site water catchment vs. centralized water supply, or aquatic wastewater treatment vs. the existing campus wastewater facility as a source of vegetative beauty and air scrubbing capacity by plant leaves. Proximity to the existing The NIST Building incorporates this principle through its ability to summarize relatively simple systems for evaluation and effective integration. The ability to coordinate between the sizing of cisterns to heat sink issues and actually accomplish the task is far greater within the NIST complex than within the city of Bozeman or even the campus. The NIST building becomes a good example of whole system planning including the backup levels offered through accepting complexity at this relatively simple level instead of trying to tackle the entire city or region. (For example, water storage could be multi-defined as wastewater treatment holding tanks to exterior landscape holding ponds to the ground water, in addition to the cisterns mentioned earlier.) This is one of many examples now possible from an information/performance standpoint.

Page 132

SOURCE SYSTEM REG/ONAL/NA77ONAL L.CJS REPLACEMENT LIFE eras TYPE | SCALE ONE SITE ENERGY •solar radiation •ground water temperature phonton sys light shelf passive heat active solar solar H2O radiant cool electric lighting (coal) electric lighting (wood/coal) electricity (coal) electricity (coal) electricity (coal) type 4 type 4 type s type d type d type d SCALE ONE SITE WATER •roof precipitation catchment POT HzO sys ponds city water ground water type d type d SCALE ONE SITE WASTE WATER •road/path ranoff intersection vegeurion ground water typed •human liquid waste solar aquatic waste water treatment plant type d | SCALE TWO cm’ MATERIALS I •recycled newspaper insulation fiberglass type 7 | SCALE THREE REGION ENERGY •Montana coal coal fired power plant i preopfrator natural gas type ? | SCALE THREE REGION WASTE WATER I •ecologically suitable aquatic plants solar aquatics wastewater treatment plants type 1 | SCALE THREE REGION MATERIALS I | -clay | flyash tilt cement national Portland cement type! type d,? | SCALE THREE STATIC MATERIAI.S | partition panels | gypsum wall board/wood studs Principle # 5 Plan for an extended use phase of a buildings life cycle. The principle relates to the length of time attributed to the use phase of a building, its environmental impacts, and the long term economic investment that a society places in the built environment. Design features such as flexibility, reuse, and material longevity lengthen a building’s useful life which, in turn, can affect the useful life of a buildings predominate materials. By building in an anticipatory manner, old buildings have paid for themselves in terms of embodied energy and other resource uses many times over. This principle reflects the disproportionately large investments made for rebuilding vs. for other investment practices which could reap greater social benefits. The diagrams above illustrate the resource and investment trends based on a structure’s useful life. The NIST building provides for an open space, almost barn like plan to accommodate flexibility within and, to some degree, outside the building. At the next stage of design development, the growth and form of one space type will be investigated relative to the next. Since cisterns are such a stationary element on the exterior, their position might be slightly shifted to allow for elongation growth. An important additional study will be made showing that, assuming Francis Duffy’s information is correct, the embodied energy of materials for changes and additions could approach operational costs more quickly than is usually believed, since little analysis has been undertaken which relates building use change over time, and the energy and resource expenditures compared to operational cost from a mechanical equipment standpoint. RESOURCE MULTIPLIER EFFECT 12345678910 6 5 4 3 2 10 9 8 RELATIVE ECONOMIC COST OF BUILDING TO SOCIETY Principle #6 Support regionalized economic loops by respecting tight knit life cycle integration. Each stage of the life cycle becomes a part of a region’s economics. Life Cycle Economics promotes the close alignment of economic benefits with the benefits of designing highly integrated material and energy flows where wastes are considered as valuable as virgin resources. Linking economics and ecology (as practiced by industrial ecologists, see Tibbs, Hardin, “Industrial Ecology,” Whole Earth Review, Winter 1992) develops the “tightness” necessary to achieve healthy, ecological, and economical regions. Establishing a framework based on the life cycle format illustrates how impact analysis is minimized. The next step is to perform a traditional life cycle impact analysis, which parallels the LCA methodology by evaluating each stage of the life cycle and the primary, secondary, and tertiary impacts. The NIST Building’s material selection matrix requires a more accurate life cycle costing than has been provided to date, not only relative to the point of use but also within the western Montana and northwest U.S. regions. The analysis for fly ash cement assumes that it has lower embodied energy costs than Portland cement, even though the fly ash is sourced over 170 miles while Portland cement is manufactured by ready-mix companies located down the street from the NIST site. The impacts of transporting bulk materials relatively long distances may offset other perceived benefits, especially when compared to local production. More information is needed relative to the long term chemical reactions of Portland cement as a CO2 absorber as compared to its CO2 emissions during manufacturing. Moreover, more information is needed to determine whether displacing the CO2 emissions resulting from Portland cement manufacturing by using 97% fly ash cement (now technically feasible) offsets enough CO2 to make it environmentally preferable to transport fly ash 170 miles to site.

Page 133

Principle #7 Create regionally relevant benchmarks through benchmark comparisons from similar environmental, technological and cultural conditions. It is unclear whether benchmark are relevant when comparing a building type to non- regionally derived best case scenarios. Two fundamental procedures are used to recognize benchmarks as performance goals for building: (1) Establishing state of the art practices or prototypes for comparison; (2) Comparing the new building effort to its regional condition. Whether it be building materials, energy sources and sinks, water, wastewater and/or other building processes, they can be designed in Life Cycle terms within a region’s capacity to supply, transport, and absorb the constituents required for a building’s construction, use and reuse. This type of benchmarking relies on five conditions: a) an understanding of the throughput in total resource terms of the building from the building process through to demolition b) the choosing of a boundary (i.e. scale of site, region, state) so that resource activity can be measured c) the state of the existing natural environment (i.e. a region could be going through degrees of stress such as diseases that are destroying a forest) d) the existing holding capacity of the environment (i.e. its sources, transports, and sink capacities) e) are we directly or indirectly effecting the biological diversity of the boundary condition within which we work or can we effect by other actions TRADmONAL DESIGN AND . PLANNING LIFE CYCLE DESIGN AND PLANNING benchmarking base case is com­ pared to state of the art only with­ in the bounds of existing technolo­ gy performance with no goal out­ side to compare this performance to METABOLIC BENCHMARK PLANNING PRINCIPLES buildings metabolic activity is compare to existing human activity and it present relation­ ship to ecological holding capac­ ity SPATIAL standard zoning has developed in the last 20 years into performance zoning but the spatial context has no environmental facsimile boundary of area becomes sys­ tem limit for performance mod­ eling both of human activity and environments capacity standard geographic information placement is merely a database spatial benchmarking technique from which geographic analysis can be done-there is no overlying principle as to structuring informa­ tion at the star that might lend itself more to environmental per­ formance that could be critical in bow data is collected as well as prioritized LOCATION place becomes connected to spa­ tial patterns of similar ecological conditions in order to make per­ formance and benchmark com­ parisons relative to the ability of life forms to provide the basic indexing for measuring the human to environment impact of a given condition The preceding diagram summarizes benchmarking principles that respect the principles outlined in this paper vs. other methods. At present, the NIST Building uses typical per square foot benchmarking based on the experience of other buildings of similar size and footprint. However, depending on the boundary chosen to assess building impacts, it may be determined that, at the campus scale, there is an allowance for only a negative amount of energy per square foot. It may be that our actions at more regional scale when comparing metabolism to regional metabolism that we are offering some positive effect due to the fact that regional biological metabolism has not been meet and the fact that we might help certain forest conditions by utilizing deceased species of wood in the building. The issue of boundary must be more carefully studied at the next work level on the project. From a landscaping and planting standpoint we could easily bring back more diversity at a higher plant level but if we consider the site itself as one of our first level boundaries we must remember that the building itself is taking up Space and displacing not only existing higher plant diversity but the immense diversity offered in the soil by the various micro biota. Hopefully by introducing more density of high plant species more dense diversity of micro biota would also result. Principle #8 Link databases into a Life Cycle Design framework for decision making. This decision support system should be designed to; a) link spatial natural resource data to life cycle alternatives within prioritized performance boundaries; b) connect natural resources to economic activities; c) link natural and human resource bases with impact and ecological holding capacity criteria; d) show life cycle costing linked to the alternatives brought about by life cycle design. This procedure become possible by using interlocking relational field matrices and communicating through a variety of programming languages. The Montana State University Building is well-positioned to be an incubator for proper design and engineering and an economic development incubator for the State of Montana. The building extends solar architecture into a comprehensive design methodology, with the potential to be transferred to projects across the U.S.. Moreover, by bridging architecture and economic development, new questions are asked and concerns are raised, thus complicating the design problem but making it infinitely richer. For example, how can the way a building is designed and engineered enhance a region’s job creation potential, and, .simultaneously protect the environment? The project also has the potential to identify opportunities to tap into the vast informational resources available to the region, by virtue of its university “anchor tenant,” and use these resources for regional resource analysis, for example, by linking into satellite information systems to provide a better spatial frame of reference for resource planning. A tremendous commitment both in time and resources is required to make this happen. Also crucial is rethinking, restructuring, and promoting fundamental design methods that have far too small an audience even today. So this project is far from done. The data is not yet linked, yet much of it could be. The procedure can no longer be one of checking off or shading empty boxes, but instead must acquire a precision, where in options are identified and trade offs made based on knowledge consistent with what intelligent architecture should be.

Page 134

1996 CLIENT: Texas Water Development Board FUNDING: Texas Water Development Board PROJECT TEAM: Annie Borden; Ric Sternberg; Wendy Price Todd; Gail Vittori TEXAS GUIDE TO RAINWATER HARVESTING

Page 135

Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting (1996) For centuries in Texas and throughout the world, people have relied on rainwater harvesting to supply water for household, landscape, livestock, and agricultural uses. Before large, centralized water supply systems were developed, rainwater was collected from a variety of surfaces—most commonly roofs—and stored on site in tanks known as cisterns. With the advent of large, reliable community treatment and distribution systems and more affordable well drilling equipment rain harvesting systems have been all but forgotten, even though they offer a source of pure, soft, low sodium water. A renewed interest in this time-honored approach has emerged in Texas and elsewhere due to: • The escalating environmental and economic costs of providing water by centralized water systems or by well drilling; • Health concerns regarding the source and treatment of polluted waters; • A perception that there are cost efficiencies associated with reliance on rainwater. From rock cisterns to hollowed out tree trunks, historical precedents abound that trace peoples reliance on rainwater collection. The Hueco Tanks in west Texas are natural rock basins that trapped rainwater for the native dwellers, from the archaic hunters to the Mescalero Apaches, and later became a stopping point for stagecqach travelers. In south Texas and the Rio Grande Valley, central plazas were often not only the place where the townspeople congregated for social affairs, but also were the collection surfaces for vast underground tanks that collected and stored water for use by adjacent shops and homes. Such notable historic structures as the Stillman House in Brownsville, the Fulton Mansion near Rockport, the Freeman Plantation near Palestine and the Carrington-Couvert House in Austin collected rain from their roofs, and then guttered and piped the water into an above-ground tank or cellar cistern. While many of these systems are no longer in use, they signify the importance that early Texas settlers placed on captured rainfall for sustenance. Today, island states such as Hawaii and entire continents such as Australia promote rainwater harvesting as the principal means of supplying household water. In Bermuda, the U.S. Virgin Islands and other Caribbean islands where rainwater is the most viable water supply option, public buildings, private houses, and resorts collect and store rainwater. And in Hong Kong, skyscrapers collect and store rainwater to supply the buildings’ water requirements. As with other natural systems, rainfall maintains its own cycles and patterns as evidenced by the severe droughts that devastated the Texas landscape in the 1950s, as well as the floods of 1981 and 1993 that ravaged east, south, and central Texas. These extremes underscore the importance of designing your rainwater catchment system with a thorough understanding of the basic principles and essential information contained in this Guide. As you will see in the following pages, many Texans today are putting their dollars behind a life-long investment in a rainwater harvesting systems over other options. A decision to reduce household water consumption to live within your means is a commitment that may not be for everyone, but it may be for you.

Page 136

Lawn 35% nest of Bathrnom Kitchen Laundm Nto, w«iw 5% 9% Cleaning ANNUAL PARTICULATE MATTER (PM,J EMISSIONS IN TEXAS BY COUNTY, 1994 More than 1,000 tons per year Less than 10 tons per year 10 to 100 tons per year ^100 to 500 tons per year ■ 500 to 1,000 tons per year ANNUAL SULFUR OIOXIDE (SO.) EMISSIONS IN TEXAS BY COUNTY, 1994 500 to 1,000 tons pet year ■ More than 1,000 tons per year Less than 10 tons per year 10 to 100 tons pet year 100 to 500 tons per year While inside water use remains relatively level throughout the year, total water demand increases during the hot, dry summers due to increased lawn and garden watering. To determine your daily water budget, simply multiply the number of persons in the household times the average water consumption. Estimates of indoor household water use range from less than 55 gallons per person a day in a conservation-minded household to well over 75 gallons per person a day in non-conserving households. Once rain comes in contact with a roof or collection surface, it can wash many types of bacteria, molds, algae, protozoa and other contaminants into the cistern or storage tank. Indeed, some samples of harvested rainwater have shown detectable levels of these contaminants. If the rainwater is intended for use inside the household, either for potable uses such as drinking or cooking or for non-potable uses including showering and toilet flushing, appropriate filtration and disinfection practices should be employed. If the rainwater is to be used outside for landscape irrigation, where human consumption of the untreated water is less likely, the presence of contaminants may not be of major concern and thus treatment requirements can be less stringent or not required at all. DOMESTIC INDUSTRIAL Taste pH Odor Acidity Poisons Alkalinity Flouride Silica Nitrate Hardness IRRIGATION Boron Alkalinity Sodium-Calcium Ratio Dissolved solids Blood Baking Soda Oraoge Julce Vinegar Sediment Dissolved solids Sediment Dissolved solids Iron Hardness pH S C—A L E-z Aesthetic concerns such as color, taste, smell, and hardness comprise the secondary testing criteria used to evaluate publicly supplied water. When assessed according to these characteristics, rainwater proves to be of better quality than well or municipal tap water. Inorganic impurities such as suspended particles of sand, clay, and silt contribute to the water’s color and smell. Proper screening and removal of sediment help to decrease problems caused by these impurities. pH is the measure of acidity or alkalinity. In a scale from 0 to 14, 7 is neutral, values less than 7 represent more acid conditions, values greater than 7 represent more basic or alkaline conditions. The determination of whether water is ‘acidic, neutral, or basic is referred to as pH which is a measure of the hydrogen ion concentration in water. The desired pH of potable water is 7 while the scale ranges from values of less than pH 7 down to pH 1 as increasingly acidic and greater than pH 7 up to pH 14 as increasingly basic. Soda pop and vinegar have a pH of about 3.

Page 137

152 ^40, AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION IN TEXAS IN INCHES (1961 - 1990) RAINWATER HARVESTING SYSTEM MAIN COMPONENTS Catchment Area/Root Storage Tank Gutters and Downspouts ROOF AREA Whether the system you are planning is large or small, all rainwater harvesting systems are comprised of six basic components: 1) catchment area/rooF, the surface upon which rain falls; 2) gutters and downspouts, the transport channels from catchment surface storage; 3) leaf screens and roof washers, the systems that remove contaminants and debris; 4) cisterns or storage tanks, where collected rainwater is stored; 5) conveying, the delivery system for the treated rainwater, either by gravity or pump; and 6) water treatment, filters and equipment and additives to settle, filter, and disinfect. The catchment area is the surface on which the rain that will be collected falls. The size of a roof catchment is the buildings footprint under the roof. The catchment surface is limited to the area of roof which is guttered. To calculate the size of your catchment area, multiply the length times the width of the guttered area.

Page 138

The Center has been engaged in greening the healthcare sector since Gail Vittori wrote the influential paper Green and Healthy Buildings for the Health Care Industry. The paper was presented at the 2001 Setting Healthcares Environmental Agenda conference in San Francisco—the health care industry’s first environmentally focused conference to specifically address green buildings, among other topics. The paper also laid the groundwork from which the Green Guide for Health Care and other ecologically oriented health care specific initiatives have been derived. 2002 CLIENT: CMPBS; Health Core Without Harm FUNDING; Jenifer Altman Foundation; The Kendeda Fund; The Kresge Foundation; Merck Family Fund; Mitchell Kapor Foundation; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation PROJECT TEAM: Kumkum Dilwali; Adele Houghton; Robin Guenther; Tom Lent; Wait Vernon; Gail Vittori; steering committee members In 2002, the Center convened the Green Guide for Health Care, the health care sectors first quantifiable sustainable design toolkit integrating enhanced environmental and health principles and practices into the planning, design, construction and operations of health care facilities. The Green Guide is now a project of the Center and Health Care Without Harm, supported by a Senior Director, three co-coordinators, and a diverse group of design, construction and policy professionals with expertise in the health care sector who serve on Green Guide volunteer committees and working groups. With Green Guide v22 Design/Construction and Operations versions in widespreod use and a reference document for LEED for Healthcare, the Green Guide will be developing the v3 tool focused on strategies to’realize a restorative, regenerative and resilient health care industry by 2050. To date, the Green Guide has more than 225 registered projects, representing more than 41 million square feet of health care facility design and construction, and more than 33,000 website registrants, more than 25 percent of whom are from outside the U.S. The Center’s engagement also includes consultancies on landmark green healthcare facilities, such as the Dell Children’s Medical Center of Central Texas— the first LEED Platinum certified hospital in the world-workshops and conference presentations. GREENING THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR

Page 139

Green and Healthy Buildings for the Health Care Industry (2000) Just CIS health care professionals diagnose a patients illness and prescribe appropriate treatment, so too are a growing number of building professionals diagnosing how buildings affect human health and the environment and prescribing strategies to minimize these impacts. This is in response to mounting evidence that buildings through their life cycle are significant causes of human illness and environmental degradation. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ERA) and its Science Advisory Board (SAB), indoor air pollution is one of the top five environmental risks to public health.’ This corroborates analyses that find that in the U.S., people spend on average 90% of their time indoors,? and that many common materials in widespread use emit dangerous compounds and harbor infectious molds, fungi and bacteria. For people confined indoors due to illness, and particularly for those with depressed immune systems, the consequences are significant. Relative to the natural environment and resources, buildings represent a formidable sector. Building-related activities are responsible for 35% to 45% of CO2 releases into the atmosphere,? a precursor to global warming, and deplete the stratospheric ozone layer by using refrigerants and products, including some insulation materials, manufactured with ozone depleting compounds. Buildings use over 75% of polyvinyl chloride (PVC or vinyl),^ about 40% of raw stone, gravel, sand, and steel, and 25% of virgin wood. Buildings use about 40% of energy resources and 16% of water, while building construction and demolition generates about 25% of municipal solid wastes.’ Each of these impacts has direct or indirect consequences on human health, the extent of which is becoming better understood as the interconnections between buildings, human health and environmental quality are subjected to rigorous analysis. Recognizing these linkages, professional associations such as the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the UIA/AIA World Congress of Architects have issued clear directives to incorporate sustainable design and green building strategies as basic and fundamental to standard practice.’ In addition, local, state and federal public policy makers are adopting green building guidelines, and corporations are establishing environmental building standards. These emerging strategies redefine the way buildings are designed, built, and operated, and extend the conventional notion of building performance to include human health and environmental quality as essential cornerstones of quality and value. This shift in practice towards green and healthy buildings is fundamentally consistent with the core value of health care professionals—first, do no harm. To this end the health care profession should advocate for public health by providing services in facilities that do not degrade the health of individuals or of the general public. Furthermore, health care professionals should take responsibility for the environmental impact of health care delivery by initiating sustainable design, operation, and maintenance practices in their facilities. The process of creating and maintaining dynamic health care settings is just beginning to be understood by owners and providers. They must learn that budgeting needs to change from first-cost to full cost accounting that, for example, extends a conventional balance sheet to include a value for health impacts and the environment. They must grasp the concept of preventive maintenance and integrated, anticipatory design. Finally, they must embrace the concept of partnering with their suppliers and design professionals to continue to explore the linkages between the nature of the physical environment and the impact the environment —including the built environment—has on medical outcomes, user satisfaction and productivity.7

Page 140

Guiding Principles More than an optimization of any single component, sustainable design and construction represents the integration of materials and methods that, together, create the physical manifestation of a building. The entire life cycle of building materials and products, as well as the building as a whole relative to its physical, environmental and human contexts on the local, regional and global scales, must be evaluated for environmental and health considerations (see the diagram below). We are informed by the U.S. EPA’s findings that indoor air pollution is one of the top five environmental risks to public health, and by the U.S. Science Advisory Board’s assessment of highest global environmental priorities: global climate change, loss of biodiversity, habitat destruction, and stratospheric ozone depletion. While not as obvious as to their affect on human health as indoor air quality, these indicators of environmental health at risk-rising global temperatures, increased exposure to ultraviolet radiation, and diminished supplies of natural resources-signal trouble for the human species. Establishing life cycle health and environmental considerations as evaluative criteria for design decisions and material and product specifications yield measurable benefits in enhanced patient outcomes, improved worker productivity, and reduced operations and maintenance costs, to name a few. This recognition should trigger immediate review and modification of existing A/E Guidelines, standard procurement policies and specifications. Upstream environmental and health impacts occur during the materials acquisition (source), transport, manufacture, and distribution life cycle stages of materials and products. These impacts can be equivalent to) 0-20 years of a building’s operation. In conventional economics, these impacts are called “externalities.” Construction of the building is the Direct life cycle stage. Its impacts are equivalent to about five years of building operation. The Use stage includes the operation and maintenance of the building and is typically assumed to ^1)1^^^)?©:|^uziR®^iy(^|^<^ui®©©IkPJi^r iimd©@i^i i^^^imiiramiL iWa&w. il^yr^TO^ @©©UW©Wti^I^^^i ^.^^^/ ©IJIWN© Z^NWWIl^ l^4Uf^ >/^^£©||?l©! l^|^Y©y®aiW %>r:3 (^-^§:^^t^vr^^r)©© ON-SITE / OFF-SITEOFF-SITE MINING, MANUFACTURING, ETC. UPSTREAM SOURCE, TRANSPORT, PROCESS, DISTRIBUTE ON-SrTF DIRECT USE OPERATE AND MAINTAINCONSTRUCT fl .^A POST-USE ADAPTIVE RE-USE, MATERIAL RE-USE, RECYCLE, DISPOSAL 10 -20 YEARS EQUIVALENT 5 YEARS EOUIVALENT 50 - 100 YEARS 0-100S OF YEARS LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

Page 141

be 50 years or more in life cycle costing estimates. Owners are interested in payback periods during the expected life of the building, i.e., in how many years will savings in operational costs become equal to or greater than an initial investment in a particular improvement. Beyond a cost justification, investment in healthy building practices yields measurable results in medical outcomes for patients. After the buildings useful life, the building can be modified for “adaptive re-use” or the building’s materials and products can be reused, recycled, or disposed. This is the Post-Use stage of materials and products. Reusing or recycling materials reduces burdens on landfills, conserves resources, and saves the contractor or owner the costs of landfill disposal. This is one example of “cost avoidance.” Case studies confirm that facilities can be greened with nominal, if any, additional costs. Design decisions and material choices that may represent higher first costs are recouped through savings in operations, maintenance and enhanced worker performance over the life of the building. Indeed, recent studies at major commercial/manufacturing facilities, such as Herman Miller’s SQA Factory in Zeeland, Michigan and at government facilities such as the U.S. EPA’s Research Facility in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina correlate superior indoor environmental quality (lEQ) with enhanced worker productivity.8 Because worker salaries represent the highest portion of a building’s operational costs, a 1% improvement in productivity far outweighs any additional costs associated with green design features or healthy materials and products? Consistent with these findings and more germane to health care professionals, other research shows that improving the quality of hospital spaces can lead to decreased length of stays for patients.io Clearly, establishing the highest achievable standards for indoor environmental quality (lEQ) is an important guiding principle for all health care facilities. Unique Characteristics of Health Care Facilities Health care facilities, averaging between 70 and 75 million square feet of construction per year,” have unique programming criteria that guide design decisions and material, product and equipment specifications. Understanding the complex of human health implications of these decisions is critical. For example, the Academy of Architecture and Health cites research indicating that natural lighting, indoor landscaping, rooftop gardens, solariums, and small atria have a health impact on hospital staff and can improve the feeling of well being and medical outcomes in patients. They recommend maximizing views of nature and landscaping from all patient environments, and increasing the use of skylights, interior transom windows, and natural Iight.i2 In addition, these buildings undergo a high rate of change, as interior spaces are reconfigured, remodeled and outfitted with new furnishings and equipment reflecting changes in management and delivery systems.13 The result is an enormous amount of waste. Recognizing this trend, the International Facility Management Association (IFMA) Health Care Council has tracked the development of flexible health care interiors based on building shell construction with universal distribution networks designed to minimize waste and accelerate schedules. According to an article in IFMA’s Facility Management Journal, “The advantages of this approach are rapid project completion, clean and quiet installation, great flexibility and costs similar to those of conventional construction, but with significant life cycle cost and operational savings.’”* Representing a substantial share of annual design and construction activities in the U.S., the health care sector is well-positioned to highlight the potential that buildings have to reverse environmental decline and to create environments for people that enhance health, patient outcomes, and workplace performance. The purchasing power represented by the health care industry can lead to industry partnerships to improve the health and environmental profiles of buildings throughout their life cycle. Recognizing this shared responsibility among designers, manufacturers, building owners, facility managers and public policy makers sets an agenda that will yield important outcomes, as manufacturers are encouraged to shift their practices in response to a growing demand for sustainable products and practices, and the allied building professionals are directed to implement green and healthy building practices. Similarly, it is appropriate and timely to establish partnerships between the regulating and the regulated communities. Guidelines and regulations overseeing hospital design and construction should be evaluated based on their impacts on environmental quality and human health and revised so that they reflect these as priority considerations. Indoor Environmental Quality While poor air quality is commonly associated with outdoor air, air inside buildings is often worse. As buildings were constructed to tighter energy efficiency standards in the 1970’s, the materials and compounds used to manufacture common building materials were found to have harmful emissions, with direct affects on people’s health. In response, improved ventilation standards were established; however, numerous common building materials and products— standard specifications for commercial and institutional buildings—continue to be sources of indoor air pollution. Both improved ventilation rates and source elimination are necessary to achieve and maintain good indoor qir quality. According to the U.S. ERA, most sources of indoor air pollution come from materials and products used in the building such as adhesives, carpeting, upholstery, and manufactured wood products that emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including formaldehyde, a probable human carcinogen.i5 Indeed, the construction industry is the primary end-user of formaldehyde- based products, representing 70% of its use.i6 Health affects of poor indoor air quality include asthma, cancer, and reproductive and development effects, and are manifested in thousands of cancer deaths and hundreds of thousands of respiratory health problemsJ7 PVC (polyvinyl chloride) is another material manufactured into numerous common building products. Concerns about its effects on human health and environmental quality have been raised by many green building proponents as well as health practitioners. Recently, the U.S. Government’s National Toxicology Program (NTP) expressed serious concern for the possibility of adverse effects on the developing reproductive tract of male infants exposed to very high levels of DEHP (di-ethylhexyl phthalate) that might be associated with intensive medical procedures. DEHP is a plasticizer that is commonly used in flexible PVC products. Also, the NTP expressed concern that exposure of pregnant women to current estimated adult exposure levels of DEHP might adversely effect the development of their offspring. Health Care Without Harm recommended that hospitals specify building products made without PVC.‘8 Consistent with this finding, substitutes should be specified for other building materials that contaminate indoor air, such as products manufactured with formaldehyde.

Page 142

Obstacles to Green Building SOLUTION Despite C I growing recognition of the benefits of green building, many factors contribute to only a modest transformation of design and building practices to date. These include the following: Resistance to change: Innovation in the building industry lags behind virtually every other economic sector, with a few notable exceptions. The consolidation of ownership of natural resources and manufacturing infrastructure retards the competitive vibrancy that has become a distinguishing characteristic of other sectors such as telecommunications. In addition, professional academic training for architects and engineers has been slow to incorporate environmental and human health considerations into the core curriculum, so practitioners leave school without the benefit of this training. Recommendation: Require the same level of innovation in your buildings as in your health care delivery systems; contract with design professionals with established credentials in green and healthy buildings; provide appropriate training to building-related professionals to implement the changed practice. Fear of liability: Introducing unfamiliar methods and materials raises liability concerns, especially when professional architects and engineers are required to stamp drawings. Recommendation: Establish strategic academic and industry partnerships, invest in research, development and demonstration projects, and monitor outcomes to reduce the liability risks. Compare the benefits of enhancing the environmental and health performance of buildings with the present liability of buildings that compromise environmental quality and human health. Consider that these present liabilities could be substantially expanded and increased as a more robust economic valuation of environmental quality and human health is codified and enforced. Perception of higher costs: Health care facilities typically operate for 30, 50, 100 years or more. An accounting system that artificially distinguishes the capital (first cost) budget from the operations and maintenance (O&M) budget hampers the ability to make decisions based on life cycle cost analysis. Recommendation: Front-loading the design process and material and product specifications to create a green and healthy building and optimize cost performance over the life of the building is a sound investment. A study by the National Bureau of Standards concludes that in a typical office the labor cost of employees is 13 times the cost of the facility itself over its life cycle, including construction, furnishings, maintenance, and interest, while the cost of design is only about l/50th the labor cost of people!”? Investing in design, materials and products that enhance productivity and improve health-related outcomes are quickly recouped and improve the bottom- line over time. Redefining buildings through their life cycle as integral parts of a healthy regional ecosystem, and as environments that directly impact human health, are basic principles of green building. Minimizing wastes, pollution, and toxins associated with the construction and operation of buildings and pursuing every opportunity to optimize indoor environmental quality are measurable performance goals. This agenda is consistent with the fundamental mission of health care professionals and should be reflected in their building portfolios. The health care industry is appropriately positioned to invest in research and demonstration projects to evaluate, make recommendations and implement policies and procedures to enhance the therapeutic qualities of health care facilities, and minimize material- and labor-intensive remodeling and renovation practices. Moreover, investments should extend to enhance the environmental performance of their buildings by adopting and implementing green building guidelines and establishing health and environmental performance parameters for all planning, design, specification, operations, maintenance, and post-use decisions. IMPLEMENTATION Short-Term Actions (Year 1)

1. Incorporate green and healthy buildings into the strategic plan, and implement corporate commitment through: establishing an in-house “green team” to review existing building-related policies and procedures, augmented by consultants as appropriate; developing green specifications; developing green housekeeping guidelines for building superintendent and custodial staff, engaging in legislative advocacy; establishing accountability protocols
2. Require architects, engineers and contractors to specify commercially available, cost competitive materials and products as substitutes for products that compromise environmental quality and human health. Example substitutes are; a) PVC-free products, e.g., flooring, wall covering, carpet backing, ceiling tile, plumbing pipe, roof membrane b) formaldehyde-free engineered wood products, e.g., oriented strand board, medium density fiberboard, plywood, furnishings c) no/low VOC products, e.g., paints, adhesives, stains, finishes, floor coverings acoustical ceiling tiles that do not support growth of fungi and bacteria d) materials and products manufactured without ozone depleting compounds (CFCs, HCFCs and halon), e.g., insulation, refrigerants, fire suppressants e) treated wood manufactured without chromium or arsenic f) certified sustainably harvested wood products (as per Forest Stewardship Council) ©

Page 143

g) highest available recycled content steel and concrete to fulfill performance requirements. 3. Provide and/or require attendance at green and healthy building training seminars for all building related staff and upper management. 4. Expand responsibilities of Environment, Health & Safety Department to include monitoring indoor air quality and ongoing commissioning of major operational systems. 5. Measure energy and water consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste generation and establish efficiency goals based on baseline. 6. Review and modify, as appropriate, U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating as a preliminary green building evaluative tool. 7 Establish reuse and recycling as prioritized tiers of the facilities’ waste management practices. Mid- to Long-Range Actions (Years 3-5)

1. Establish life cycle metrics for environmental, human health and natural resource performance to guide design decisions, material and product specifications and construction and operational protocols.
2. Design for the long-term (50-year+ building life expectancy).
3. Merge capital & O&M budgets to optimize life cycle costing.
4. Establish procurement policies and building material and product specifications consistent with the green and healthy metrics; provide for annual review/revision.
5. Establish partnership with regulators to review/revise regulations to reflect impacts on human health and environmental quality.
6. Establish an internal green and healthy building rating system, and/or adopt the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED with amendments to reflect particular priorities of health care facilities with focus on environmental health criteria and environmental exposures. 7 Establish permanent position to oversee compliance with green and healthy building standards and create a template for green building design, construction, operation and maintenance.
7. Provide ongoing green building training opportunities (on-site/off-site) for all building related staff and upper level management.
8. Integrate/balance resource flows (energy, water, materials) to enhance life-cycle efficiency.
9. Design for flexibility to facilitate operational changes, respond to changing user needs and minimize waste generation and labor requirements. Endnotes
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indoor Air Quality Home Page. , 23 August 2000. wwwepa.gov/iaq/
11. U S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Healthy Buildings. Healthy People. A Vision for the 21st’ Century” (Draft Report). Office of Air and Radiation. March 2000.
12. Roodman Malin. David & Nicholas Lenssen, “A Building Revolution How Ecology and Health Concerns are Transforming Construction” Worldwatch Institute. Washington DC March
14. Geiser, Kenneth, Ph.D.. presentation materials, June 2000. 5 Roodman Malin, David & Nicholas Lenssen, “A Building Revolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns are Transforming Construction” Worldwatch Institute, Washington, DC, March
16. American Institute of Architects, Sustainable Design Resolution 00-3, passed unanimously by convention delegates. May 6,2000. and UIA/AIA World Congress of Architects, “Declaration of Interdependence for a Sustainable Future.” Chicago, Illinois, 18-21 June 1993. 7 Yarme, Howard and Judith Yarme, “We Have Heard of Sick Buildings, But Can Buildings Also Be Therapeutic?”, Health Care Facility Research Consortium, Barrington, RI, 2000
17. U..S. Green Building Council, LEEDTM ” Reference Guide. Pilot Version 1.0, April 1999. 9 American Institute of Architects Committee on the Environment, “Healthy, Productive Buildings, A Guide to Environmentally sustainable Architecture.” www.e-archltect.com/pia/cote/hlth_ bid asp
18. Porimucha, Joseph P. AIA. James Lussier. Barbara J. Huelat, “Health-Facility Planning, Design, and Construction: It Costs How Much? Bottom Line Reality.” Conference Report. Academy of Architecture for Health
19. McKohon. Donald, AIA, “Health care Facilities: Current Trends and Future Forecasts.’ Planning Design and Construction of Health care Environments, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health care Organizations, Oakbrook Terrace, IL 1997
20. Ibid.
21. Baskervill & Son, “Health care Design Newsletter,” 2000, 804/343-1010 14 Yarme, Howard and Judith Yarme, “Assuring Speech Privacy in Flexible Health care Settings’ Facility Management Journal, International Facility Management Asociation 15 LIS. Environmental Protection Agency, “Indoor Air Facts No. 4 (revised): Sick Building Syndrome.” Office of Air & Radiation, Office of Research and Development, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, April 1991.
22. Massachusetts Toxins Use Reducation Institute, 2000 Formaldehyde Chemical Fact Sheet, .www.turi.org 17 US. Environmental Protection Agency, “Healthy Buildings, Healthy People: A Vision for the 21st Century” (Draft Report), Office of Air and Radiation. March 2000
23. Health Care Without Harm, Press Release: “Government Panel Expresses “Serious Concern” that Toxic chemical In Vinyl Medical Products May Harm Sick Infants”. 13 July 2000
24. American Institute of Architects Committee on the Environment. “Healthy Productive Buildings- A Guide to Environmentally Sustainable Architecture”
    bld.asp www.e-architect.com/pia/cote/hlth_

Page 144

REGISTERED MEMBERS OF THE GREEN GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE (113 COUNTRIES) REGISTERED MEMBERS OF THE GREEN GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE (2010)

Page 145

A. a letter from Robin Guenther, Wait Vernon, and Gail Vittor The Green Guide For Health Care Go-Coordinators (2010) We thank our past and future volunteer steering committee and working group members for the gift of their time and extraordinary knowledge. We also want to extend particular thanks to our primary funders, the Merck Family Fund and The Kresge Foundation, for providing the essential financial support that have made this work possible. ri ‘5 -fc The Green Guide for Health Care was conceived eight years ago to accelerate the integration of green building into the healthcare sector. Predicated on a belief that health care should “do no harm”, and anchored by the precautionary principle, the Green Guide has emerged as an influential effort that is reshaping the design, construction and operations of healthcare facilities in the U.S. and abroad. We have benefited from the collective work of a remarkable group of volunteers who have carried this vision forward in creating the first of its kind green building toolkit customized for healthcare facilities. We have engaged in meaningful collaborations with healthcare systems and allied organizations. We believe that healthcare has a unique opportunity to raise the mantle of health as a fundamental tenet of green building, particularly as we are faced by a rising tide of environmental challenges that require revisiting our basic assumptions about the construction and operation of buildings. Our bold vision of cancer treatment centers built without materials linked to cancer; pediatric clinics free of chemicals that trigger asthma, and hospitals with healthy food, fresh air and sunlight is being realized today. This powerful intersection of buildings, human health and environmental quality has guided the Green Guide’s work through this decade. As we become more conscious of healthcares environmental footprint—for example, greenhouse gases, water, air, toxic chemicals, land—we commit to our continued role as c tool developer focused on realizing a resilient and regenerative portfolio ol healthcare facilities and infrastructure by 2050.

Page 146

The redevelopment of the 711 -acre former Austin Mueller Municipal Airport began in earnest in the early 2000s, conceived as a master development with 10,000 residents and 10,000 jobs. Sustainability was identified early on as one of Mueller s six central tenets, along with fiscal responsibility, economic development. East Austin revitalization, compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods, and diversity. CMPBS began our collaboration on the project in 2004 at the request of Mueller’s Master Developer Catellus Development Group. In the six years since, we have collaborated with Catellus and Master Planner ROMA Design Group (now McCann Adams Studio) and a host of other project consultants on integrating the shared interests of sustainability and New Urbanism into a coordinated effort. Green Urbanism, merging environmental protection, economic prosperity, community cohesion, bicycle, pedestrian and urban transit connectivity, abundant open space and aesthetic beauty around a common, cohesive theme. In 2006, the Center developed the Mueller Green Resources Guide, a nuts and bolts primer on the how’s and why’s of green urbanism, including extensive lists of resources and references. The book was structured to orient and align Mueller’s construction contractors, building owners and residents around Mueller’s impressive goals and signature themes. All buildings at Mueller are required to follow either the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED” for New Construction green building standard or Austin Energy’s Green Building Program rating system through to certification; the four signature themes: protecting air quality; urban heat island effect, protecting the night sky, and creating green buildings provide a cohesive framework to inform all horizontal and vertical development. In addition, CMPBS Co-developed and oversaw compliance with construction best practice requirements associated with waste management, noise, and air quality targeting the non-building construction activities, not in widespread practice even today. 2004 CLIENT: Catellus Development Group FUNDING: Catellus Development Group PROJECT TEAM: Gail Vittori, Adele Houghton, Andy Karvonen, Dan Overbey, Alex Stadtner, Cassidy Ellis, Sarah Hill, Mary Petrovich Mueller was selected as one of about 240 LEED ‘for Neighborhood Development Pilot Projects in 2007, and received designation as a Stage 2 LEED Silver Plan in 2009-at the time, the largest LEED for Neighborhood Development pilot project at any stage. Mueller is now pursuing the final Stage 3 LEED for Neighborhood Development certification to reflect the full build-out of this green urbanism hub in central Austin. GREEN URBANISM AT MUELLER

Page 147

Mueller Green Resources Guide (2004) The Mueller Green Resources Guide is a reference document to support green building practices at Mueller. Consistent with a vision for Mueller to be a model of responsible urban development is a commitment to embrace green building as intrinsic to this goal. Green building is an approach that incorporates healthy, socially responsible, and cost-effective strategies into the design, construction and operation of buildings. Today, green buildings are recognized as good for the environment, for people, and for the bottom line. Over the last three decades, there has been heightened awareness about the effects buildings have on the environment and human health. Buildings on a national basis are responsible for 30% of all energy use, 17% of water use, 40% of raw stone, gravel, sand and steel use, and 25% of virgin wood use. In addition, buildings generate about 30% of carbon dioxide emissions (a greenhouse gas associated with global warming) and 35% of municipal solid waste. Extracting, processing, and transporting these materials can disturb sensitive ecological systems, and result in particulate and chemical emissions that can pollute the air, land and water. Furthermore, because people spend about 90% of every day indoors, it is essential that buildings have a healthy indoor environment. By integrating climatic design principles with environmentally-sensitive construction practices, healthy building materials, native landscaping, and energy- and water- efficient electrical and plumbing equipment, green buildings have lower operating costs, higher return on investment and appreciation, and enhanced occupant health and productivity. Based on recent studies, green buildings on average have a first cost premium of about two percent, which is quickly recouped from lower operating costs. Moreover, with the prospect of escalating energy costs, green buildings are recognized as a smart business decision in addition to a demonstration of community and environmental stewardship. The master plan for Mueller is based on sound urban planning principles that emphasize a walkable, pedestrian-friendly streetscape and mixed-use development pattern; transportation options including auto, bicycle and pedestrian connectivity; clustering of development to provide parks and open space; and, a series of wet ponds that remove pollutants from stormwater. Because these planning principles reinforce the sustainability and green building goals of the project, the Mueller site design and development exemplifies “green urbanism.” Four Green Urbanism Signature Themes will be applied to the design and construction at Mueller to create a development that reflects the values of the Austin community for many generations to come. Each Signature Theme is divided into the following sections: a) Overview; b) Punch List which summarizes key strategies; c) Strategies which specifies guidance for implementation; and d) Terminology. The “Protecting Air Quality” section addresses both exterior and interior air quality issues. The section is organized into Design, Construction, and Operations. “Mitigating Urban Heat Island Effects” provides strategies to help mitigate a site’s contribution to elevated air temperatures in urban areas. The strategies outlined in this section are organized into Footprint, Shade, and High SRI Materials. “Protecting the Night Sky” addresses the effect that light pollution has on nocturnal habitat. The strategies outlined in this section are divided into Design, Energy Efficiency, and Operations. “Creating Green Buildings” provides strategies organized into Climatic Design, Materials Selection, Energy & Water, All projects at Mueller are required to follow either the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED-NC (New Construction) green building standard or Austin Energy’s Green Building Program (Commercial, Multi-Family Residential, or Single-Family Residential). In general, the two standards are similar in layout. They both outline multiple green building strategies, some of which are mandatory for certification and others that can be pursued at the discretion of the project delivery team.

Page 148

USGBC’S LEED GREEN BUILDING RATING SYSTEM & AUSTIN ENERGY’S GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM All projects at Mueller are required to follow either the U.S. Green Building Councils LEED-NC (New Construction) green building standard or Austin Energy’s Green Building Program (Commercial, Multi-Family Residential, or Single-Family Residential). In general, the two standards are similar in layout. They both outline multiple green building strategies, some of which are mandatory for certification and others that can be pursued at the discretion of the project delivery team. The table below provides a summary of the green building requirements for each building type at Mueller. Either program can be used for most building types; however, only the Austin Energy Green Building Program is available for single-family and duplex residential buildings. These are minimum standards and building teams are encouraged to exceed them. USGBC’S LEED GREEN BUILDING RATING SYSTEM The U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System is a voluntary, consensus-based national standard for creating high-performance, sustainable buildings. The USGBC, a national non-profit organization, has rapidly become the most widely recognized green building standard in the U.S. There are currently six LEED standards and four Application Guides available or under development, corresponding to a variety of building types. Commercial and multi-family projects at Mueller can choose to follow the LEED-NC standard, which is the most highly developed and widely used LEED standard. • Eligibility: Commercial, office and retail. Multi-family residential projects four stories or greater • Mueller Requirement: Certified (minimum 26 points) Higher certification levels are encouraged • Fees: Registration and Certification fees apply based on project size OVERVIEW LEED-NC is currently in Version 2.1. See Table 2 for current fees. The rating system is organized into five major categories; Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality. A sixth category. Innovation and Design Process, addresses strategies not covered under the existing credits and exemplary performance. This final category is important because it allows for novel approaches to green building and site specific elements not addressed by the other categories, and recognizes participation of LEED Accredited Professionals on the design team. STRUCTURE Each of the LEED categories is divided into prerequisites and credits (see Table 6). Prerequisites are required of all projects following LEED. Each project delivery team has the option of choosing which Credits to pursue based on the particular goals and opportunities provided by their project, with a minimum of 26 points required to achieve LEED-NC certification. TABLE 1 — Green Building Minimum Requirements Building Type USGBC LEED-NC Certification Austin Energy Green Building Program Office* Single Tenant Retail* Institutional Buildings* LEED-NC Certified and/or Two-Star Rating Multi-Family Residential# Single-Family and Duplex Residential LEED-NC Certified [Not applicable] and/or Two-Star Rating Three-Star Rating Note: Builders and Developers are encouraged to exceed tliese standards

• Applicable to buildings greater titan 25,000 gross SF.
• Multi-family at the Mueller Airport Redevelopment is defined as hating tliree or more units. However, tlie LEED-NC standard is only applicable for buildings of tliree stories or gieater. TABLE 2 — LEED-NC Fees (current as of September 2005) Less than 75,000 SF 75,000 to 300,000 SF More than 300,000 SF Registration Members $750 $0.01 per SF $3,000 Non-Members $950 $0.0125 per SF $3,750 Certification Members $1,500 $0.02 per SF $6,000 Non-Members $1,875 $0,025 per SF $7,500 Note: These costs are valid as ofjuly 2005 and are subject www.usgbc.org for current information. to change. See TABLE 3 — LEED-NC Rating Levels jLEED-NC Rating Required Points Certified 26 to 32 Silver 33 to 38 Gold 39 to 51 Platinum 52 to 69 AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM The Austin Energy Green Building Program (GBP) is a locally-based program that assists the design and construction sectors in creating sustainable buildings. The program provides a wide array of technical resources to address commercial buildings and single-family and multi-family residential buildings.

Page 149

OVERVIEW The GBP Commercial Rating Tool is organized around a checklist of green building measures for the design and construction phases of a project. The checklist includes Basic Requirements that must be fulfilled as well as Voluntary Measures that earn points towards star ratings ranging from One-Star to Five- Star. Table 7 lists the GBP’s Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures. The certification levels for the GBP Commercial Tool are summarized in Table 9. Eight Basic Requirements must be completed for the building project. Voluntary Measures are organized into six major sections: Team, Site, Energy, Water, Indoor Environmental Quality, Materials & Resources, Innovation. • Eligibility: Commercial projects; Multi-family residential projects four stories or greater • Mueller Requirement: Two-Star Rating Higher certification levels are encouraged • Fees: None REGISTRATION & CERTIFICATION The first step is to establish contact with the Green Building Program. The GBP representative assigned to the project will provide technical assistance on the rating tool and implementing green building strategies. Once the project is completed, the project delivery team submits documentation to the GBP representative, who performs a site inspection and reviews the submitted documentation to confirm that all of the Basic Requirements and pursued Voluntary Measures have been successfully achieved. Once it is confirmed that all of the Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures have been achieved, the project is awarded a GBP star rating. Certification levels are awarded based on the number of points achieved in the project. The required points for each certification level are summarized in Table 9. MUELLER REQUIREMENT - GBP MULTI-FAMILY OVERVIEW Multi-family residential projects at Mueller of three or more units have the option of using the GBP Multi-Family Residential Tool. This tool is similar to the GBP Commercial Tool but has different Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures specific to multi-family projects. Table 8 lists the Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures of the GBP Multi-Family Residential Rating Tool. The certification levels for the GBP Multi-Family Residential Tool are summarized in Table 10. • Eligibility: Multi-family residential projects up to three stories • Mueller Requirement: Two-Star Rating Higher certification levels are encouraged • Fees: None MUELLER REQUIREMENT - GBP RESIDENTIAL OVERVIEW Single-family and duplex residential projects at Mueller are required to follow the GBP Single-Family Residential Tool. This tool is similar to the GBP Commercial and Multi-Family Residential tools but has different Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures specific to single-family projects. Table 11 lists the Basic Requirements and Voluntary Measures of the GBP Single-Family Residential Rating Tool. Eligibility: Single-family and duplex residential projects Mueller Requirement: Three-Star Rating Higher certification levels are encouraged Fees: None TABLE 9 — Summary of GBP Commercial Rating Tool Certification Star Rating Points Required One-Star [Fulfill all basic requirements] Two-Star 30 to 36 Three-Star 37 to 43 Four-Star 44 to 58 Five-Star 59 or more TABLE 10 — Summary of GBP Multi-Family Residential Rating Tool Certification Levels Star Rating Points Required ’ One-Star 40 to 59i [Fulfill all basic requirements) Two-Star 60 to 89j Three-Star 90 to 129 Four-Star 130 to 179| Five-Star 180 or greater TABLE 12 — Summary of GBP Single-Family Residential Rating Tool Certification Levels Star Rating Points Required One-Star 40 to 59| Two-Star 60 to 89I Three-Star 90 to 1291 Four-Star 130 to 179I Five-Star 180 or greaterI DECIDING BETWEEN GBP CERTIFICATION, LEED CERTIFICATION, OR BOTH Commercial projects at Mueller have the option of achieving either LEED or GBP certification. Projects may also choose to pursue both green building certifications. Project teams that aim for greater exposure and recognition for the green features of their buildings often pursue LEED certification because the program provides national recognition. It is also an attractive option to national firms familiar with the LEED process and with an established methodology for achieving green building certification. Projects interested in local exposure or less familiar with green building practices may decide to pursue GBP certification. Because of its local nature, the GBP commercial tool is more specifically tailored to building projects in Austin and GBP representatives are readily available for consultation. Pursuing both GBP and LEED is also a feasible option, and is advantageous because it rewards the project at both the local and national level. Neither of the standards conflicts with the other. In fact, in many cases, they complement one another. The standards do not have identical requirements, however; thus, it is important for project teams who opt to pursue both to have a thorough understanding of their similarities and differences. For the strategies that are similar, the project delivery team should pursue the more stringent standard.

Page 150

PROTECTING AIR QUALITY URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT Air quality is a leading indicator of human and environmental health. According to the US ERA, Americans spend about 90% of each day indoors suggesting that the quality of indoor air is intimately related to human health. Recently, it was estimated that direct medical costs of indoor air quality (lAQ) problems in the United States amount to $15 billion per year, while indirect costs could be as high as $60 billion. Clearly, air quality is an economic, public health and social concern. Fortunately, the past few decades have seen significant improvements in policies related to air quality, including regulations that prohibit building occupants from smoking tobacco and legislation to outlaw harmful products such as lead-based paint. Air-borne particulates and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have also received attention due to their direct impact on human health. An increased use of coatings, sealants, and other chemicals in buildings has led to research on indoor air quality, concentrating on its effect on human health and environmental quality. Mueller has the opportunity to make significant gains in protecting outdoor air quality by designing buildings that use less energy and by taking advantage of many transportation options to reduce automobile travel. As with many urban regions, Austin air quality has frequently exceeded the federal eight- hour ozone standard in recent years. If air quality levels are not improved, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will eventually classify the region as a non-attainment zone and implement a mandatory air quality improvement plan for the region. Punch List: DESIGN • Breathable building skin / natural ventilation • Proper HVAC system filtration • Occupant control over airflow, temperature, and lighting • Entryway system pollutant control • Separate ventilation for equipment and chemical mixing rooms • Low-VOC paint, sealants/adhesives, carpet, furniture, ceiling tiles CONSTRUCTION • Building Flush-Out/IAQ testing prior to move-in • Reduce pollution on site during construction; write low emission equipment standards into landscape and construction contracts • Construction Air Quality Manager OPERATIONS • lAQ Facilities Manager • Low VOC materials for building interior and exterior maintenance • Low emitting lawn care equipment On summer days, the air temperature in urban areas can be as much as 6-8°F higher than in surrounding areas. This phenomenon, commonly referred to as the urban heat island effect, occurs when dark constructed surfaces absorb the sun’s energy instead of reflecting it back into the atmosphere. The urban heat island effect is of particular importance in large cities located in warm climates such as Austin, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Houston. Buildings impacted by the urban heat island effect require additional energy to satisfy their cooling loads in the summer months. In Los Angeles, this phenomenon results in an estimated additional $100 million per year in energy costs. The raised temperatures in these cities also alter the region’s microclimate- and create inhospitable conditions for native wildlife and plant habitat. According to studies conducted at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Heat Island Group, photochemical reactions of certain airborne pollutants intensify as ground level temperatures increase, resulting in increased ozone, a component of smog. For example, studies in Los Angeles have found that for every degree Fahrenheit increase in temperature above 70-F, the incidence of smog increases by 3%. Researchers are still in the process of determining if and how the localized nature of urban heat islands contributes to global climate change. At present, the only direct linkage established between the two phenomena is the impact of increased air conditioning load resulting in increased fossil fuel combustion. Punch List: FOOTPRINT • Compact building footprint • Minimum parking required by code • Stack building over parking Maximize pervious walkways, drives, etc. SHADE • Plant vegetation strategically to shade structures and pavement • Green roof HIGH SRI MATERIALS • High emissivity roof • EnergyStar^ roof • Pervious or porous pavement • Light colored paving materials

Page 151

PROTECTING THE NIGHT SKY Light pollution was tirst identitied by astronomers who found the sky glow above towns and cities increasingly disruptive to their research. Brighter urban areas are the result of urban growth and the proliferation of exterior lighting. In recent years, light pollution has been broadly recognized by the general population as an aesthetic and wildlife habitat concern, as well as serving as an indicator of wasteful energy use. Concern over the effects of light pollution has expanded in recent years as the importance of dark conditions for animals, plants, insects, and humans has become more established. Increased nocturnal light levels adversely. Light pollution is a symptom of wasted energy use. In the U.S., an estimated $2 billion is spent annually on ineffective lighting, resulting in an estimated 19 million tons of carbon dioxide and other air pollutants. And, the need for more efficient and effective exterior lighting continues to grow along side rising energy costs, impact foraging, breeding, and sleeping patterns of all living organisms, particularly those that function best with darker skies. For example, Austins beloved bat colonies, a significant tourist attraction and a natural form of insect control, depend on dark skies to forage and are negatively impacted by increased ambient light levels in the Austin metro area. Protecting the night sky results in strategies that are more effective, economical, and environmentally friendly than conventional exterior lighting design. The intent of controlling light pollution is not to do away with exterior lighting but rather to provide effective and uniform exterior illumination while avoiding the light pollution problems of glare, light trespass, and uplighting. Protecting the night sky at Mueller will create safer conditions for residents and visitors in addition to conserving energy. Punch List: DESIGN • Uniform lighting design — more lights, lower overall illumination • Lighting plan — zone light levels based on an area’s function • Conform with neighborhood exterior lighting context • Specify full cut-off fixtures • Plant vegetative cover to minimize light trespass • Top light signs and buildings — prohibit uplighting RESOURCE EFFICIENCY • Specify energy-efficient fixtures • Specify low-mercury fixtures OPERATIONS • Adjust light fixture angle during scheduled maintenance • Install a mechanical or astrological timer Install motion sensors where appropriate • Have safe collection areas for recycling used lamps CREATING GREEN BUILDINGS Green building is an integrated, systems design approach that has its roots in the energy crisis of the 1970s. Energy performance was the single defining factor of environmentally responsive buildings during those years. By the late 1980s and early 1990s, the green building community had expanded the practice to include a much broader range of design factors including water, materials, environmental quality, and human health. Today, the term green building’ has become synonymous with ‘sustainable’ and ‘high performance’ building. It is an approach that incorporates healthy, environmental, socially responsible, and cost effective strategies into the design, construction, and operation of buildings. Green building professionals often combine high-tech with low-tech strategies, such as coupling photovoltaic panels with natural ventilation to create a comfortable and energy efficient indoor condition. Similarly, a rainwater harvesting system enhances the effectiveness of a low-water landscape design’s use of potable water. In this way, ‘green building’ or ‘high performance building’ refers to thoughtful, innovative design that works with nature to maximize building performance. Mueller offers several avenues for the pursuit of green building design. Punch List: CLIMATIC DESIGN • Building orientation • Appropriate shading • Natural daylighting • Rainwater harvesting MATERIALS • Low-emitting materials / energy • Rapidly renewable materials / Recycled content materials • Salvaged / Refurbished materials • Chemical-free termite control ENERGY & WATER • Renewable energy • Non-ozone-depleting HVAC refrigerants and fire suppression • Combined Heating and Power • Low-flow toilets, faucets, shower heads • Reclaimed water CONSTRUCTION & OPERATIONS • Construction air quality Construction waste management • Tree protection • Green housekeeping and landscaping

Page 152

2008 CLIENT: Triple L Management, LLC; Verano Land Group, LP FUNDING: Verano Land Group, LP PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Ariel Fisk-Vittori; Lovleen Gill-Aulakh; Mimi Kwan; Jody Rosenblatt-Noderi; Gateway Planning Group (urban design and planning); J. Robert Anderson (landscape architecture) Verano is a planned community utilizing the SmartCode, LEED for New Development, and the Congress for New Urbanism s approach to transects. As we looked at the lists of procedures, we realized that the very concept of life regenerating itself was not possible; the cycles were not there. We intervened by deciding to take what is required by the SmartCode and LEED into a cyclical rather than a linear list. We utilized the ecoBalance framework’s connection of water, energy, and food at each transect scale, taking the attitude that when sometHng was unlikely to balance at one scalar level, residuals could be taken into account at the next level. Interestingly, we also realized that to fill the gaps in the list at each scale, we needed an intervention that could be supportive of green businesses. We created not only cycles within cycles, in a symbiosis between buildings and landscape, but also took into account the business angle. We labelled each intervention as a source or resource business with the expectation that monetary and ecological cycles were working in consort. This also allowed us to use icons as an accounting procedure, labelling businesses and how they connect to each other in multiple levels of flow. Thus, we could diagram the industrial ecology of a business overlayed into the economy and workings of a community built with the accompanying footprints. VERANO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ©

Page 153

The EcoBalance Approach to Transect-Based Planning (2009) At Verono, a mixed-use development of 2,500 acres in San Antonio, Texas, the life cycles of water, building materials, and energy become meaningful to us on- and off-Site. So meaningful that the balancing of resources has been incorporated within the SmartCode, and the completion of these cycles marks our primary criterion for success. With the full support of local government officials, Verano was entitled December 6, 2007, under the newly adopted SmartCode. The Verano Project Team worked closely with the City of San Antonio and the City South Management Authority for almost a year to calibrate the SmartCode for City South. Planned under the SmartCode, Verano will be enlivened for generations as the Texas A&M Campus and the adjacent university neighborhoods of Verano grow and blossom together. While planning the community, the Project Team competed for the opportunity to secure placement of the Texas A&M Campus within Verano. Selected by the Texas A&M System Board of Regents, almost 700 acres for the campus were donated from within Verano through the generosity of Verano Land Group, LP and its investors. At build-out, Verano and Texas A&M could be home to 30,000 residents, 30,000 students and 30,000 jobs, generating an estimated tax base of $2 Billion. Verano will include a town center across the street from the new Texas A&M Campus, anchored by a future commuter rail station. Three villages will surround the town center to the north and east, each containing a wide variety of housing, greens, plazas, trails and neighborhood retail. Finally, a hamlet will grow around Canvas Back Lake to the east. In addition to destination retail and office buildings that are designed to be urban and walkable, Verano will provide sports and entertainment facilities, including community and competitive fields; the Verano Research and Technology Center between the Texas A&M Campus and the Toyota Plant, as well as an aging in place and health care district. Incorporating all of those ingredients, Verano and the new Texas A&M Campus will be designed as a classic university community. The Verano community will also work to create a sustainable balance of ecological responsibility, social well-being, and economic viability. This balance will build on the neighboring Toyota plants sustainable legacy as the cleanest manufacturing facility in North America, and the future Texas A&M Irrigation Technology Research Centers sustainable water technologies. Veranos commitment to sustainable living will also create significant opportunities for synergies between Verano and the Texas A&M campus for research and a lifelong learning life style. This university community can literally become a living laboratory for sustainable living-socially, economically and environmentally. Veranos location is significant for many reasons: Verano sits in the midst of rich historical and cultural • traditions, including Mayan and later Spanish settlements, which produced the beautiful plazas and buildings of the Missions District World Heritage Site just north of Verano. The site’s previous use as grazing land has kept it open, with many beautiful trees, good access to water, and a rich abundance of native understory. Veranos development strategy is to conserve the natural resources on the site. Because water is critical to the future of all developments in Texas, Verano plans to conserve existing water resources on the site, and to capture and reuse storm water sources to minimize its net water requirements. The leading edge research at Texas A&M’s Irrigation Technology Research Center at Verano will play an important role in enabling water resources to be used wisely, not only at Verano, but throughout the country. Veranos transportation access provides many alternatives for private and public transportation. Roadway access includes Loop IH 410 to the north and major road access on all sides of the community, as well two new major thoroughfares through the university and surrounding community, including a multi-use Boulevard anchoring the main entrance of the campus across the street from Veranos Town Center. The town center is also planned as the southern terminus of the future Austin-San Antonio Commuter Rail. Finally, Verano will work with VIA, TxDOT and Texas A&M to create a comprehensive transit system for City South. Much of the contemporary landscape of western settlement has been designed for cars only, generating a strong reaction as communities struggle to repair the natural links between community and environment. Designed to support walking, Verano addresses issues of mobility, health, sustainability, equity and access to nature. Focusing on pedestrian needs gives communities a window into a deeper understanding of sustainable forms of human settlement. To correct our course away from an unhealthy future, planning should look to traditional, and sometimes ancient, urban design forms which include a pedestrian way of life. In Son Antonio there are many places that have survived as places of renewal for millennia, still in active use, still shaping the ecology of modern cities. The Verano team is appreciative of the embracing of this philosophy by the community and the leadership and staff.

Page 154

TOPOGRAPHY TOPOGRAPHY SLOPE ANALYSIS Ligond Propel Bounorry Tein AW O&nWtes Rizo ASPECT HYDROLOGY SOIL SOIL SUrTABILITY: CONSTRUCTION LOTnd . T<mAOl E~&res Wl SuttabOty fOT toidi and Foundaboni SOIL SUITABILITY: INFILTRATION GEOLOGY CULTURAL HISTORY The Verano project is only a few minutes from downtown Son Antonio, one of the greatest cities on the American continent with rich and diverse history. The importance of this proximity for.Verano lies in the historic and urban genius of Son Antonio, in the type and scale of its overall layout, and in the general feeling of having an authentic character. These attributes have made San Antonio a very popular place not only to visit but also to live. The presence of great historic neighborhoods, the existence and fame of the River Walk, as well as a different take on tradition in recent years, have made Son Antonio more real in its everyday functioning as a living place. We can safely say that it represents one of the best examples of a real community in Texas and beyond. We envision a self-sustaining, walkable, pedestrian friendly, inter-generational, authentic, fully functioning and beautiful community environment- a small town - with all the ingredients of what makes a great place to live. The primary strokes on the land are the location of two principal access routes - the east-west arterial (a multi-way boulevard) and the north-south University Boulevard. Six human-scale neighborhoods (1/2 mile across), with a variety of housing types, are nestled between the surrounding roads and the northern riparian corridor, which is the major open space of the community. Most interesting topographic features are occupied either by neighborhood centers or by important points of reference such as a water tower. In addition to the major parks, smaller parks are sprinkled throughout the neighborhoods providing places for play and recreation, areas for storm drainage and water retention, and generally accompanied by higher densities. Every effort will be made to save existing trees. Tress that are movable will be placed in a temporary nursery and planted again. Lot platting and street and driveway design will be executed with tree protection and preservation in mind. The greatest development intensity is projected for the southeast area of the project - directly adjacent to the future transit station - where the town center is located. Intensity diminishes as we move to the west. A network of streets and alleys serves the project. All lots front on open spaces, parks or streets..

Page 155

T3 T6 Uses and Buildings in T3 Land Uses: Low density residential and home occupations. Buildings: Houses and outbuildings. Private Frontages: Common lawns, porches, fences and naturalistic tree planting. Public Frontages: Open swales, some flat curbs, bike lanes and naturalistic tree planting. Thoroughfares: Roads and a few streets; rear lanes, some unpavecL Open Spaces; Orchard, parks and greens. Uses and Buildings in T4 | GENERAL URB^ |Z0NE |URBAN CORE ZONE |URBAN CENTER ZONE| T5 | ITM| T4 ^ LESS DENSITY, LARGER BLOCKS, PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL, SMALLER BUILDINGS, MORE GREENSCAPE, DETACHED BUILDINGS, ROTATED FRONTAGES, YARDS AND PORCHES, DEEP SETBACKS, ARTICULATED MASSING, WOODEN BUILDINGS, GENERALLY PITCHED ROOFS, SMALL YARD SIGNS, LIVESTOCK, ROADS AND LANES, PARKS AND GREENS. MORE DENSITY, SMALLER BLOCKS, PRIMARILY MIXED-USE, LARGER The Transect is a framework that identifies a continuous range of habitats from the most rural to the most urban. The continuum of the Transect, when subdivided, lends itself to the creation of zoning categories with appropriate subdivision standards. These zoning categories include standards that encourage diversity similar to that of organically evolved settlements. The standards specified by the zoning categories overlap, reflecting the successional eco- zones of naturally developed human communities. One of the key objectives of Transect planning is the creation of immersive environments. Successful immersive environments are based on the selection and arrangement of all the components that contribute to a particular type of environment. Each environment, or Transect zone, is comprised of elements that support and intensify its locational character. So, patterns and buildings that may be appropriate for T3 are not appropriate for T6. This approach prevents inappropriate intermixing of rural and urban character through a proper balance between the two, and creates more-or-less fixed but identifiable physical characteristics for each Transect zone. Land Uses; Buildings: Private Frontages; Public Frontages: Thoroughfares: Open Spaces: Medium density residential and home occupations; limited commercial and lodging. Houses and outbuildings, side yard houses, townhouses, live/work units, corner stores, inns. Porches and fences. Rased curbs, narrow sidewalks, bike lanes, continuous planters, street trees in alley. Streets and rear lanes. Squares and playgrounds. Uses and Buildings in T5 Land Uses; Buildings: Private Frontages: Public Frontages; Thoroughfares: Open Spaces: Medium intensity residential & commercial (retail & offices), lodging, civic buildings Townhouses, apartment houses, live/work units, shopfront buildings, office buildings, hotels, churches and schools Stoops, dooryards, shopfronts & galleries Raised curbs, wide sidewalks, bike routes, continuous or discontinuous planters, and trees in alleys Boulevards, avenues, couplets, main streets, streets and rear alleys Squares, plazas and playgrounds Uses and Buildings in T6 Land Uses: Buildings: Private Frontages; Public Frontages: Thoroughfares: Open Spaces; High intensity residential and commercial (retail & offices), lodging, civil buildings. High and medium rise apartments and office buildings, hotels; townhouses, live/work units, shopfronts, churches, civic buildings. Stoops, dooryards, forecourts; shop fronts and galleries Raised curbs, wide sidewalks, bike routes, discontinuous planters, and trees in alleys Boulevards, avenues, couplets, main streets, streets and rear alleys Squares, plazas and playgrounds

Page 156

mnpdin teoRohd CANVASBACK LAKE WBRANO RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY CENTER DISTRICT T3

9^ TEXAS A&M CAMPUS TEXAS A&M IRRIGATION RESEARCH CENTER LEGEND LJ T5 T6 m SPECIAL DISTRICT EJ TEXAS A&M CAMPUS

Page 157

_________SUSTAINABLE DESIGN OPTION POINT SYSTEM Category Credit Identifier Description Credit Score WATER Stormwater Management (Volumo) Retain (infiltrate, reuse, or evapotranspirate) 1’of rainfall from a percentage of the project’s teve!%>ment footprint 5.0 20% of development footprint 1.0 0.0 40% of dovelopmont footprint 20 0.0 60% of development footprint 3£ co 60% of development loolprini 4,0 0.0 100% of development footprint 5.0 pro Stormwater Management (Quality) Remove 80% of the increment increase in the annual mass loading of total suspended sotris from a percentage of the project’s dovelopmont footprint 5.0 20% of development footprint 1.0 0.0 40% of development footprint 2.0 0.0 of development footprint 3.0 co 80% ol development footprint 40 co I00% of development footprint 5.0 OO Stonnwater Management (Flowrate) Detain Ilowrale ol posldevolopment ronof i to pro devclopmenl rates 2 years 1.0 0.0 5,25, and 100 year (whore FILO Is available) 1.0 pro Non-potabte water Provide norepotable water source for irrigation for 50% of primary land uses Non Residential uses 10 0.0 Residential uses 1.0 op Habitat and Wetland Conservation Conserve 100% ol all riparian conidors (as defined by Floodplain administrator) with a buffer from me edge ol the floodplain ol al least 50ft lor seasonally dry and iOOfI lor constant Ifowinq riparian areas 1.0 0.0 AIR Minimum Site Disturbance Percontago of land area left undisturbed per development Pattern. Hamlet (20%), Village (15%), Regional Center (10%) excluding area prohibited from development by law (to. fkxxfohins) 1.0 0.0 Enhanced Restoration Area restored must be 25% greater than the area requiring the restoration and must exceed 5% of the total natural area to wheih it is contiguous 1.0 0.0 Heat Island Reduction Provide combination ol the lollowing on 50% of non-tool impenrious site landscape: shade, paving materials with Solar Rollectance Index (SRI) of at least 29 or open grid pavement system 1.0 0.0 Reduced Automobile Centerline miles of Bicycle Lanes. Multi-Use Pats, and’or routes to centertine miles of proposed streets excluding sitewalks along streets. 4.0 11010 1.0 0.0 Dependence 1107 20- 6.0— Ito 4 3.0 3.0 1 to2- io’ io— Tree Canopy Preserve or mihoale tree canopy al 5% above mandatory area taken as an overall project average as defined by 35% Tor hamlets and villages and 40% lor regional centers. 1.0 1.0 Dedicated transit lanes Dedicate one transportation lane to by used only lor mass public transit 1.0 1.0 HEALTH Brownfield Locale project on a site (part or all) that is documented as a contaminated (Voluntary Cleanup Program or ASTM E190307 Plrose il Environmental Site Assessment) or on a site designated as a Brownfield by a local, stale, or federal agency. Use cleanup method. 4,0 1-5 Acres 1.0 01) 6-10 Acres 21) 0D l1-t5 Acres 3.0 OD 16-20 Acres 4.0 4.0 Access to Active Spaces 50;^f all lots must be within 1/2 miles of general playfields; soccer, baseball, basketball, and/or sports 1.0 01) Access to Transportation Alternatives 50% of all buildings are within 1/4 mile of multi-use trail or bicycle trail ol at least 3 miles in length or a public transit stop. 1.0 0.0 HEALTH Green Building Master Development Pattern Plans shall construct Green Buildings in accordance with LEED and’or Metropolitan Partnership for Energy 3.0 25% ol total buildings in MDPP Certified Green t.O 0.0 26-50% ol total buildings in MDPP CertTied Green 2.0 0.0 51-75% of total buildings m MDPP Certified Green 3.0 0.0 LAND DESIGN Public Civic Uses Donation ol land for public chric uses (acres) above and beyond current requirements. 1.0 6.9 Steep Stopo Protection No dovelopmont on pre-project slopes of greater than 15% 1.0 0.0 Street Network Street grid density ratio ol project > 20 (centerline miles/sq miles of project), exefuding alleys and lequlatoqr floodplains 1.0 1.0 Pedestrian Conidor Destination Minimun ol two blocks In length of a mixture of p^, open space, retail Irontage, water features, plaza, and new/oxlsting landscaping along a linear comdor/parkway 1.0 1.0 Civic Space Provide at least 6^6 per pedestrian stred. 1.0 1.0 Access to External Connectivity Provrda tlirough streets along the project boundary at Intervals ol 800 feel 1.0 1D Community Garden Cumulative 1/2 acre community garden per pedestrian shed (food productive garden) 1.0 OD Dlvdfslty of Housinq Type Add at least one extra housing type In at feast two T-Zones in each development pattern. 1.0 0.0 Cooperative Parkinq Plan One or more cooperative parkinq plans reqislered In accordance with 35526 (g) 10 0.0 OTHER Innovative Integration of Environmental Credits If the applicant meets requirements in at least three of the four categories (Water, Air, Health, Land Design) of design standards, an extra point shall be awarded 1.0 1.0 Total Points Avaibble 43.0 TOTAL WATER HEALTH ENERGY LIND DESIGN OTHER 3D REPRESENTATION OF •TR,\NSECTZ0NE SPATIAL CELITUCTERS LN HIOLKN SETTLElfENTS The life cycles of water, building, materials, and energy has been incorporated within the SmartCode. The SmartCode is a transect-based development code available for all scales of planning, from the region to the community to the block and building. The Transect approach of New Urbanism helps us to understand performance both within a Transect Zone and when considering individual processes throughout the entire community. By building upon the Transect approach and assessing the performance requirements within the each transect, we enable the entire community to benefit from a replenished resource future. Like many other procedures, the SmartCode simply lists criteria to be implemented instead of conceiving of the list as actually providing for a cycle of activities that help resource balancing. An ecoBalanced SmartCode, on the other hand, shares the basic provision of demonstrating and providing for the full life cycle accountability of a variety of human life-support flows. The addition of ecoBalance to Smart Code accomplishes the following: a) completes cycles which adds the necessary steps to the existing SmartCode list to complete life cycles; b) integrates one cycle with another; and cl realizes economic opportunities (many cyclical activities are potential sustainable businesses fitting three economic roles: production, sales, or maintenance revealing the economic opportunities that this type of program offers within the community and/or region verses procedures that are simply not conscious of this aspect). EcoBalance phases are identified by using land-based eco-technologies; each of these technologies has a quantifiable land area required for its functioning. The ecoBalance footprint corresponds to the immediate physical land/space that contributes to human life-support activities. These life-support activities can be given a range of approximate physical dimensions or footprint areas, for both the Source and Re-source phases of the life cycle to show balancing as demonstrated for T-3 and T-6 here. We use the Source and Re-source lexicon herein as a matter of convenience (it actually represents the Source and Process in one part of the cycle and the Use and Re-source in the other).

Page 158

Approximately 162 acres of the Verano development fall into the T-3, or Sub-Urban, Zone. This zone is divided into a hierarchy of land-use types: buildings, landscape (land around structures), streetscape, and open areas. EcoBalance attempts to balance the air, water, food, and energy needs of the Transect Zone within the physical footprint of that zone. The building, followed by the landscape, is the primary and most efficient scale at which to attempt ecoBalance strategies. The streetscape offers fewer opportunities for balancing strategies, and open space is the final scale at which to propose intervention. If the Source and Re-source needs of the T-3 population cannot be met within the 162-acre area of the T-3 Zone, the proposed eco-industrial development bridges the footprint gap. Source and Re-source footprints of T-3 are determined using standard figures for per-person footprint in each life- support category. Sourcing and Re-sourcing techniques are identified for each of these categories. An overlay of needed footprint to available footprint in the T-3 Zone of the site reveals gains or deficits in each life support system. At present, Veranos T-3 land area is 162 acres with required integrated footprint of 648 acres, resulting in a 486-acre deficit. This figure represents the total additional area needed to balance the basic needs of Veranos suburban population which needs to be balanced by eco-industrial development. SOURCE RE-SOURCE 02 Footprint For 1 person 5000sft For 3718 ppi 450acre CO2 Footprint For 1 person 7500sft For 3718 ppi 648 acre Water Harvest Footprint For 1 person 400sft For 3718 ppi 32acre Water Treatment Footprint For 1 person 400sft For 3718 ppi 32acre Food Harvest Footprint For 1 person 4000sft For 3718 ppi 338acre Food Compost Footprint For 1 person 2000sft For 3718 ppi 162acre PV Footprint For 1 person 1OOOsft for 1 vehicle 250sft For 1 Unit 2250sft For 1487 Units 98acre Solar Thermal Footprint For 1 person 80ft For 3718 ppi 8 acres For 1 Unit surplus TECHNIQUES FOR SOURCING/ RE-SOURCING AIR BUILDING •Green Roof •Green Walls LANDSCAPE •Trees •Shrubs •Lawn •Food Garden STREETSCAPE •Trees •Open Grid Pavers OPEN SPACES •Trees •Shrubs •Lawn •Food Garden s- 0

4 36 38 64 288 acres 24 36 38 64 486 acres S 0 D BUILDING 24acres’ LANDSCAPE 36 acres LANDSCAPE 36 acres STREETSCAPE __ 38 acres __________ STREETSCAPE 38 acres OPEN SPACES 64 acres OPEN SPACES 64 acres DEFICIT 288 acres DEFICIT 486 acres B 18 14 B-+ L BUILDING ___ IBacre^ ___ BUILDING 8 acres LANDSCAPE 14 acres LANDSCAPE_ 10 acres _______ STREETSCAPE - STREETSCAPE 14 acres OPEN SPACES - OPEN SPACES DH.|C.IT - DEFICIT - L 8 32 32 56 210 acres S 0 D 32 28 52 50 acres s-Z 0-= D-= eVLCTNG Hacres BUILDING LANDSCAPE 32 acres LANDSCAPE 32 acres STREETSCAPE 32 acres STREETSCAPE 28 acres OPEN SPACES 56 acres OPEN SPACES 52 acres DEFICIT 210 acres DEFICIT 50 acres D 18 80 8 BUILDING _. —Bacres. lGarres 10 acres 20 acres LANDSCAPE STREETSCAPE OPEN SPACES DEFICIT- lANOSCAPF STREETSCAPE OPEN SPACES DEFICIT

Page 159

Code ECO BALANCE ENERGY CHART FOR T3 Best Management Practices light colored exlerior/pavements Code S,M ventilated rool/venlilaled attic deep set/overhang/awning windows shaded porches/balconies shaded streets and alleys low embodied energy building low energy water system low energy landscape low maintenance materials S, M reusable materialsl/siruclures S, M solar sireet/path lights solar electric PV provision solar hot waler provision daylighting provision energy conserving lights energy conserving appliances energy conserving fenestration solar oriented fenestration high R value insulation 22 9 M bike lanes inter model cycle bus train center walkable community ECOBALANCE LAND DESIGN CHART FOR T3 Code s/R SB Best Management Practices 1 e M protect existing micro flora (teasl disruption of top soil) 2 e P,S pedestals for natural landform, minimal slab foundation 3 e P,S pedestrian bridges over drainage / 9 P, S,M use stabilized earth sidewalks/paddng 5 9 P, S,M porous paving sidewalk/parking 6 e M support breeze corridor 7 e M foster low heat gain pavement 3 e M Texas Trail system (walk, bike) 9 e P.M edible greenways 10 e P.M swaled greenways Table Legend e Source Q Re-Source Sustainable Businesses at level & transect zones P -Produce S -Sell M- Maintain ECO-BALANCE WATER CHART FOR T3 Best Management Practices P,S,M P,M P.M P, S.M P,S,M roof top rain/AC condensate caputre and storage create infiltration trenches water absorption ponds end ol pipe bioswales impervious surface parking driveway green machine fertilizer,insect control tree imgalion/treatmenl ol runoll 8 @ P,S,M shallow well reuse reed treatment pond for landscape reuse waler consen/alion fixtures Code P,S.M P.S.M decorative flower microbial treatment bed fish pond colleclor/vector treatment system NOx treating pavement aviary vector control ECO-BALANCE HEALTH CHART FOR T3 SB Best Management Practices vegetative leduction of ppm (stroet yard) Nox absorpthra cements elect landscape mainlainence reduces C02 & 03 embodied C02 combined spec. M extensive vegetation to aid 02 & C02 (wails, roofs, terraces) microbial based waslo waler troatmcnl (reed wetland) M plant bbbasod waste water troalrent (tree duster) S.M UV vs chlorine purifications 03 aeration vs chlorine- purification ram water harvesting Ilaxtb inert buildmq comporents arid pesticides/ hertades ircorpoQta living machines (birds, amphtbans, microbes, mammabl greenwa’/e walkabJity pattern designated walkabilily wayfinding walluibwiy signago bike paths/ stalls/ altowabllny accesble exercise vegetative herb gardens P,M Gsh/planl restaurant community garden blophR/ nature accessabUiiy btophex/ views dayfightng seasonal landscapes life cycle event driven tasks outdoor meetings pubCc areas endless adventure regional trails historic/ cultural regional paliems houselWd compost/vonnicullure P,M honey house butterfly gardens

Page 160

EcoBalance footprinting occurs in all seven transect zones of the Verano Development. At the T-6, or Urban Core, Zone, the hierarchy of land-use types considers the three-dimensional nature of the zone. Intervention can occur on the roof with strategies such as green roofs that link air, water and food balancing. Similarly, the building envelope and the metabolic volumes of the buildings themselves become nested. Although they are still somewhat helpful, other intervention scales and the limited open spaces between buildings offer the fewest opportunities for ecoBalance strategies in the T-6 Zone. Perhaps the most important aspect of T-6 balance interventions is the recognition that we must start to create systems throughout the cityscape instead of focusing on a single building. This strategy affords us many cooperative opportunities between and within mixed-use development that has, as yet, hardly been investigated. An approach similar to the one used for T-3 is used for Veranos T-6 Zone.Even though its land area is only 76 acres, the effective footprint is 240 acres as a result of adding vertical areas and metabolic volumes. The required integrated footprint is 800 acres, resulting in a 560-acre deficit that must be balanced by the eco-industrial development. SOURCE RE-SOURCE 02 Footprint . For 1 person 5000sft For 4230 ppi 512 acres C02 Footprint For 1 person 7500sft For 4230 ppi 800 acres Water Harvest Footprint For 1 person 400sft For 4230 ppi 50 acres Water Treatment Footprint For 1 person 400sft For 4230 ppi 50acres Food Harvest Footprint For 1 person 4000sft For 4230 ppi 392 acres Food Compost Footprint For 1 person 2000sft For 4230 ppi 200 acres PV Footprint For i person lOOOsft for 1 vehicle 250sft For 1 Unit 2875sft For 1692 Units 128 acres Solar Thermal Footprint For 1 person 80ft For 4230 ppi 8 acres For 1 Unit surplus TECHNIQUES FOR SOURCING/ RE-SOURCING AIR BUILDING Green Roof • Intensive • Extensive • Hybrid LANDSCAPE Green Wall •Outdoor •Indoor STREETSCAPE Vertical Greenhouse •Integrated •Separate OPEN SPACES Landscape •Plants •Softscape •Hardscape 116 48 16 272 acres ECJf AAEA GOec.o BUILDING ENVELOP 116 acres METABOLIC VOLUMES 48_acres OPEN SPACES 16 acres DEFICrr 272 acres MV. OS RA’ BE MV- OS- ROOF AREA 60 acres BUILDING ENVELOP 116 acres METABOLIC VOLUMES 48 acres OPEN SPACES 16 acres DEFiCiT 560 acres RA 5Qacres 2 38 10 RA -Ml flll MV-----Z OS-L ROOF AREA 50 acres BUiLbiNG ENEVELOP - METABOLIC VOLUMES” OPEN SPACES - - TyEFICTI----------------------------:------ 60 38 30 16 248 acres RA, BE-:r MV-Z 0S- - 18 22 160 acres BE-E D-E MV -A 60 acres BUILDING ENEVELOP 38 acres METABOLIC VOLUMES- 30 acres OPEN SPACES 16 acres DEFICnr 248 acres 60 36 16 16 BUILDING ENEVEiOP ?6acies METABOLIC VOLUMES OPEN SPACES 16 acres DEFICIT 16 acres ROOF AREA 2 acres BUILDING ENEVEL0P __ METABOLIC VOLUMES 38 acres OPEN SPACES 10 acres DEFicrr ROOF AREA BUILDING ENEVELOP 18 acres METABOLIC VOLUMES 22 acres OPEN SPACES DEFIOT 160 acres ROOFAREA 3acres. BUILDING ENEVELOP METABOLIC VOLUMES OPEN SPACES DEFicrr - - —

Page 161

ECO-BALANCE ENERGY CHART FOR T6 Code S/R SB Best Management Practices / e light colored exterior/pavements 2 e M aspirating facades 3 e M PV shading facades f e - shaded balconies 5 e shaded streets and alleys G e low embodied energy building 7 e - low energy mainlainence landscape S e — low maintenance materials 9 e P, S,M PV shades interior 10 e S,M. PV paints 11 e S,M ice battery district cooling 12 O S,M open/llexible/reusable large building systems 13 e P,S,M pump storage water lowers/rool tanks 14 e - energy consenring lights 15 e energy conserving appliances - elevators 16 e energy consenring fenestration 17 e M building to building utility sharing 18 e S,M fiber optic day lighting/ 19 e S,M Low rpm rool lop wind systems /1 20 O inter model cycle bus train centerI 21 Q bike lanes __________________________ 22 e S,M wind system elevator integration li 23 e P,S,M vertical and horizontal green spaceM 24 e M heal pump geothermal foundations
25 O M v2g and g2v plug-in parking garages’ 26 e P, S,M hi-rise pedestrian bridges. 27 G building to building waste heat reuse 28 O M fish/planl/wasle integrated restaurants 29 0 S.M large vertical plant based atrium humidifiers ECO-BALANCE LAND DESIGN CHART FOR T3 Code S/R SB Best Management Practices I e P, S.M replace ground footprint with mixed flora green root e M increase soil/vegetalion with vertical green walls 3 O P,S, M replace C02/02 balance with large vegetation filters / e P develop multi.level pedestrian bridges 5 e P.M use stabilized earth sidewalks/parking G e P. S,M porous paving sidewalk/parking 7 e P,M create sound & pollution bamers w/vertical wall vegetation S e P use NOx absorptive paving 9 e low heal gain pavement 10 e P. S.M create green citygates where rural & urban enterprise meet 11 O P,M creato ^cessiblo food gardens (icof. streets) 12 O £S,A£ ovale cd bio street bee system 13 fresh food vertical greenhouses Table Legend e Source @ Re-Source Sustainable Businesses at level & transecl zones P -Produce S-SeZI M- Maintain Code Code ECO-BALANCE WATER CHART FOR T6 S/R SB Best Management Practices st3 gracing, h^gh-perfornwig bndscapo. greater IrXtaton rool top rah’AC condesante camire and stoogo redrect downspouts from sewer systems to treatmont prer/zde po-uton control prior to entering storm n’el repas and eipansxm to existng pipes mkrodet&iton and rernedaton in pariung lots regional stonrrarater management-tund stream rcstoratonbufters Impervious surface limi^ with curbrng landscape sites wiiNn parking areas below grade tree imgatkntreatment of rurofl oushed stono acec^ria aaraton seepage wel redrotoon reed treatment pond lor landscape rouse forest sod mante treatment (lan&ape) tecoralNO Cower microbial treatment bed (landscape of ofl-slv fish pond coTectorfyector treatment system (off shell & lands/ NOx treating pavement (oil shell) aviary vector control ECO-BALANCE HEALTH CHART FOR T6 SB Best Management Practices — vegotativo reduction ol ppm _______________ M deci landscape rantalrence reduces C02 & 03 — extensive vegetation aids 02 & C02 P. S.M mega flora plantations (C02 ^ & 02 supply) P NOx buikmq surfaces P.M vertical growing green walls P.M large/UItobby plant air fiUeratons (VOC) plant trobasad waste water treatment UV vs chlorine punfications 03aeration vs chlorine- H20 cycle ram wafer harvesting vertical plant wastewater treament tel’ll inert bufCTg components avoid p^tc.dx’hortrodcs incorperate Itvmq machnes (brd; arrphtans, rrtretes. rranvrct) bo based rfeet rrjr&he’urag icarbon batonemg) lamo sca’e venrjx’twe systems (h-^Ur, soJi qreenwava wa^ohbry wayfMnq walabily signage M edb’o landscape P.S,M contahed res dentialtirban gardens bird house buttertty gardens nieqraied fishplanl farms vertical greenhouses, food prodjetien labynnthian ercutatfon (paOsbridgessteps) exercise energy phnis daylighting _______________ seasonal larxfccapes life cyclo event efaven tasks outdoor mectiW public areas endess adventure regional tra3s testoricZ cultural regional patterns

Page 162

w^ mG§tyxj^v@xyju^ W) GAG?(^^©I^B^ 1982 GRENADA 1983 COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1984 PUERTO CABEZAS 1985 INDIAN NATIONS HOUSING 1986 STONEHAVEN RETREAT CENTER 1987 CARPENTER RESIDENCE GILL RESIDENCE RESOURCE EFFICIENT HOUSING PROTOTYPE TEXAS FARM WORKER SERVICE CENTER D^ Q/y^^iWiO^i§mTO@^(^^^^ RESEARCH AND EDUCATION MODEL, BALL STATE WHITE HORSE ELDERS LODGE 1989 GRIFFIN WEST 1990 ABC BUILDING SYSTEM 1991 CARROLL COLLEGE STUDENT CENTER CENTER FOR HOUSING INNOVATION 1992 ARMAND BAYOU NATURE CENTER GREENING THE WHITE HOUSE GOVERNMENT CANYON STATE PARK NOLAND RESIDENCE 1993 ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS 1994 CAMP VAL VERDE SELF-SUSTAINING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVANCED INDUSTRIALIZED HOUSING SYSTEM SHAUCK RESIDENCE D^ (I^^^D0©XoXL (^l^^j(yi^ FRIEDRICH WILDERNESS PARK DOLAN FALLS RANCH 1999 PALO DURO CREEK RANCH PENTAGON RENOVATION PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE PAVEMENT STRATEGIES FOR US/MEXICO BORDER SEATTLE JUSTICE CENTER AUSTIN RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE HOMELESS 0@0^0@I!D ©QOmOOQI^W^ MATAGORDA ISLAND MASTER PLAN ^@@^ Q!BaMI^?©W@^lJ^^ DELL CHILDREN’S MEDICAL CENTER OF CENTRAL TEXAS 2003 AUSTIN FEDERAL COURTHOUSE SHELDON LAKE STATE PARK RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS ^®@^ @WMffl^ CMPBS 30 YEAR MASTERPLAN ADKIN’S RANCH DELL PEDIATRIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM BAT TOWER LANCE ARMSTRONG FOUNDATION HEADQUARTERS

• DELL CHILDREN’S MEDICAL CENTER NEUROLOGICAL SUITE EL PASO GREEN CITY FANT HOUSE NEW AUSTIN CENTRAL LIBRARY ZACH THEATRE 2@)0@) 0©14Wmi@reQWI^^ MOROCCO ECO CITY

Page 163

MSU EPICENTER: EIGHT PRINCIPLES SEATTLE SALMON FRIENDLY BUILDING VISIBLE GREEN ECOBALANCE GAME | QR CODE | PROTO 1 SCOPE’ EL PASO GREEN CITY MOROCCO ECO CITY GREEN GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE AIA’S ENV. RESOURCE GUIDE .LIFE CYCLE. 1 FRAMEWORK’ TEXAS’ GUIDE TO RAINWATER .HARVESTING 7 AREA | POINT t NETWORK ECOBALANCE | PLANNING FOR MISKITO INDIANS

Page 164

This small town in South Texas had its gas cut-off in the winter of 1977 due to a contract dispute with the town’s monopoly gas supplier, leaving the 8,100 residents without heat and hot water. Posing an immediate health risk, the Zavala County Community Development Corporation contacted the Center to assist in an emergency response capacity. The initial response provided space heating for the town’s residences, with about 1,200 surplus Korean tent wood-burning stoves installed in six weeks coupled with a community mobilization to collect mesquite wood from dry stream beds. The engagement evolved to develop a simple, low- cost, integral passive solar water heating system made of recovered materials, including spent fluorescent light bulbs and used printing plates, costing about $25 for new materials. The fluorescent bulbs were an ideal glazing material because they provided solar concentration and double-glozing. The mercury in the fluorescent light bulbs was safely recovered and collected for recycling. With funding from the U.S Community Services Administration and the National Center for Appropriate Technology, a community-based solar water heater factory was designed and put into operation, with a local crew trained to manufacture six solar water heaters per day with four employees at a unit cost of about $ 125.00. The federal funding supported the manufacture and installation of about 500 solar water heaters in five counties, some of which are still in operation today. Crystal City’s solar water heater factory was replicated in five other south Texas towns, creating green jobs and “fueling” the towns with abundant solar energy. 1977 LOCATION: Crystal City, Texas CLIENT: City of Crystal Qty, Texas FUNDING: National Center for Appropriate Technology; U.S. Community Services Administration PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Jeff Lanza; Tom Teasdale Multi-level Coordination of Low Cost Community Produced Passive Solar Systems in Crystal City, Texas (1979) Small, high-poverty, rural towns in South Texas are experiencing increasing difficulty in supplying energy sources at a price obtainable by their citizenry. Some of these towns are being forced to default on previous contracts to suppliers upon which their original development plans were based. High degrees of coordination between labor, running capital, local and federal institutions, and their indigenous resources must now occur. Passive solar technologies are an integral part of this redevelopment of process and innovation cross hybridization of appropriate technologies can make many of these attempts affordable where previously they were not. The common belief that solar technologies must, by nature, cost more than conventional utilities is an impossible condition under a high-poverty situation (fifty to eighty percent of the population being below poverty guidelines is common in south Texas, especially during the winter season). One of the only possible solutions without massive government subsidy is a careful and gradual reorganization aimed toward self-sufficiency. This organization is internal and external in nature. Internally, it is not only a question of education, but one of convincing local agencies to coordinate in areas previously unheard of. It is also a relearning about indigenous resources and their use, many of which have been thrown away in order to keep up with middle America. Internal organization is also a question of when, and in what way, should a municipal government become its own utility. How can the present government, from an internal political standpoint, throw out past planning policies that were set on growth? Programs that cost millions now suddenly become obsolete. External organization becomes a question of coordinating Federal agencies with grant funds to hinge around a highly regional cause which has very special attributes quite different from other regions. It involves rethinking of weatherization programs which, in their textbook form, rarely include indigenous resources or capabilities. The beginnings of organizational techniques that can actually lower the cost of technologies such as passive solar collectors, greenhouses, dehumidification systems and many others are demonstrated in Crystal City, Texas. We have helped this small town (population of 8,100) collect over 1,000 cords of mesquite wood, and installed 1,000 wood burning stoves. They have 150 - 200 solar hot water heaters and have already gone through some substantial recycling efforts to reduce the cost of materials. CRYSTAL CITY ©

Page 167

RECYCLED GARDEN HOSE TO SEPARATE TUBES FROM TANK RECYCLED, CLEARED OUT FLUORESCENT LIGHT TUBES OR TEDLAR COATED FIBER­ GLASS HOT WATER HEATER TANK REFLECTIVE SURFACE USING RECYCLED PRINTING PLATE OR FLAT GALVANIZED METAL RECYCLED 2x4 FRAME TO DISTRIBUTE wEIGHT ON ROOF ”C flective Aluminum Printing Place Recycled 2x4’s Flourescent Licht Tubes Recycled Hot Water Tanks sidi ships tube glazing ouk/t upper plate sial compresr/cm Invyids 14) sprinqs (z) fowm ships boHura gasket’ boHowi plait reinfOTting homu oaoefynblq innm uppUi plate uppth goziktb—- twnk —v-_ coYnpreffum ski fc plestic glazing- boHom gasket 1. inshU 1” thick Fonmn compression rings ORownd-kvnk wiHi RTVsilicone ce/nu/nh 4.o4fix olumoinwm plako to hornru. with oval head wood screws. 3.MsbUsheri mehl rebimer on own) Flue inlet to hold bottem plait F?at 0f—.to bolhnm of tank. 2. install 1” wide favrn rubber ship to sidio q cirnkn rail where tubes unll tach, inshll mebl shaps+springs below rubber on rail, aligned unlh rings. ZcoyvrucV(insulajtd) ho} cund cold wakn pipes. 5. instil 35-40 recqcld lubes. LOYvneeV spring shops.’ 6.mown} ho/rne on roof. As we come down to individual components within the Crystal City Solar Collector, the following cost reductions result from recycling. By utilizing recycled fluorescent light tubes with an assumed recycle price of twenty-three cents each (which is high and includes labor), we find a nineteen percent cost reduction compared to flat filon-covered greenhouse plastic (which does not perform as well as the fluorescent tubes neither spectrally nor thermodynamically). By utilizing recycled tanks, including labor, for dismantling and acid cleaning, we find a cost reduction of sixty-eight percent. Over all, the total savings, including installation of a simple passive collector, is thirty-three to thirty-four percent. This brings the price well below a new electric hot water heater. Our collector was priced out at $105, including labor. Too often such grassroots technology is not viewed by the scientific community as having much relevance in advancing the field of solar energy. However, some important integrative aspects of the so-called soft technologies should be brought out. First, continuing on some of the design aspects of the same recycled solar collector, certain thermodynamic and spectral issues, rarely placed into production by the solar industry, have been addressed. Fluorescent light tubes are not simply a replacement for glazing but, when placed on a north-south axis, prismatically bend the light during the daylight cycle. Our system concentrically utilizes these tubes around the tank for the best seal. As we compare performance of our system to plastic type glazing, we find consistently better performance, from 5° to 15’F. Even under static conditions, the Crystal City Collector averaged a 49% efficiency over a three day period. The Solar Data Center at Trinity University has found a twenty gallon model of this collector capable of producing about 12, 000 BTU daily, or fifty gallons of 110°F hot water.

Page 168

&smhBarf%4&, turf 7CHx^ hear Hon fo ut— teMorr yiyn^ punek are. Rja^&l^ ^^1% screens fa- t^ertw^’ vevtfitaticH. Rrch Opera-lie^ /turner Gree/hofc^ OpeMicM /Winter There are findings of similar nature in the passive technologies category in relationship to attached solar greenhouses. Our framework is totally made up of recycled wood members placed in a rib truss formation. The rib truss is standard practice in the building industry for roofing members. However, there were two reasons for using this technology under the present circumstances: 1) truss plates replace toe nailing and thus circumvent the issue of old nail holes; 2) ribs can be prefabricated at a city warehouse and delivered to the site, thus reducing the time spent disrupting the family. Cost reduction of the total greenhouse is 28% ($5.17 per square foot vs. $3.72 per square foot). It is important to note that, to the user, stress perception is addressed where space is a critical topic to a large, low-income family. It, in effect, could replace migrant housing efforts for a room addition while, at the same time, fulfilling the stress perception of needing heat. A greenhouse also has a completely adaptable glazing system so that the greenhouse turns into a screened-in breeze porch during summer months. During the winter, the greenhouse supplies all the 120 days of heat requirement.

Page 169

NEW OROTCO CEIUN6 IN I’rciD iNsuunoN’ ^SMO/ABU USOOUTE FOR. WNTU UM rsnvG RBii (‘INTO HOUS BLOCK on EIVER BOTTOM G’^‘COCUGATCO METAL ROOFING FILL p-ATV

Page 171

Passive solar technologies, when responsive to the natural resources, labor and economics of the self-reliant community, may become our next stage in solar innovation. Cookbook approaches and indiscriminate borrowing of technologies is only one adolescent step in our progress. Many of these technologies must literally grow out of the total circumstances one finds in a given microregion.

Page 172

1977 LOCATION: Ingram, Texas CLIENT: Gary Priour, Hill Country Youth Ranch FUNDING: The Meadows Foundation PROJECT TEAM: Daria Bolton Fisk; Pliny Fisk III; Lansing Pugh A home for abused, neglected, abandoned and troubled children located in Ingram, Texas, the Hill Country Youth Ranch engaged the Center to provide ecological land planning services along with design and engineering of one of the first residential lodges for the Ranch’s children. The 6,500 square foot passive solar building took advantage of a sloped site for earth berming to stabilize indoor temperatures throughout the year, and featured a building integrated south-facing cistern to cool incoming southeasterly breezes and a heating system comprised of a double-wall and double-floor mass exposure. Abundant on- site caliche resources serve as the buildings primary interior and exterior wall material. The light colored unfired caliche block were manufactured in a nearby mohair warehouse, and offered an opportunity for the Ranch’s children to be active participants in the construction of their home. HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH

Page 178

Located in the Winter Garden region of South Texas, the Center was engaged by the Community Services Agency of Dimmit, LaSalle and Maverick Counties to establish a caliche block production operation, with a passive solar Girl Scouts Headquarters becoming the community demonstration opportunity for these low embodied energy, locally manufactured block offering local employment and energy efficient affordable housing opportunities. Caliche, a readily available calcium carbonate material that does not conflict with agricultural production, was complemented with bamboo, another abundant regional resource used to replace steel reinforcement in the building’s foundation, roof trusses and door and window lintels. The building was designed and engineered with a nighttime roof re-radiation system for summer cooling and an attached solar greenhouse for winter heating to offset reliance on fossil fuels for heating and cooling. 1980 LOCATION: Carrizo Springs, Texas CLIENT: David Ojeda, Community Services Agency of Dimmit, LaSalle and Zavala Counties FUNDING: Community Services Agency of Dimmit, LaSalle and Zavala Counties; U, S. Department of Energy PROJECT TEAM; Pliny Fisk III; Steve Musick Availability and Spatial Coincidence of Indigenous Building Materials (1982) The main purpose of this building is to develop the use of a wide variety of local resources and to show what impact this approach could have on local energy consumption and job production. The building utilizes material combinations as well as utilities in more detail and keys these components into spatial maps. The building shell contains six regional systems. They include a trickle-type reradiating roof, bamboo for reinforcing of foundation as well as for door and window lintels, caliche for use as mass and structural building block, and mesquite hardwood for hardwood tile floors and as a sawdust base for insulating exterior block. The sophistication of indigenous construction methods come through when we compare the work accomplished (in terms of energy or structural stress) to the amount of energy put into the process in order to accomplish this task. We will use a structural example. Within our calculations, we found bamboo takes approximately 170 times less energy to produce than its equivalent steel reinforcing bar. If we can assume a life expectancy of 50 years (for which there is good reason to believe) if all fabrication methods are followed, we can expect the bamboo will take about 28,000 p.s.i. in tension. Our cantilevered lintels as well as our roof trusses are both under tension. Compared to common steel at about 20,000 p.s.i. tension, we have a material in bamboo which supplies a higher structural capacity by forty percent, using 172 times less energy! Other similar comparisons could be made, for example, in a wall’s ability to store heat or cold, depending on your purpose, for a given season. The caliche walls are energetically better since they contain more heat capacity than conventional walls (only twenty-five percent of the energy cost is for fabrication). Our building form is a natural outcome of an adaptive effort for a species (in this case, homo sapiens) to learn better and better survival tactics. Energy use is one major criterion for natural selection. The more efficient a species can live given certain resources, the more likely it is for that species to continue on a survival path. In fact, it has been shown that those species who are able to allocate considerable energy for the purpose of valuable information storage in order to project this information to their young are the most survival worthy. 1 wonder if it can also be demonstrated whether those species that are able to expand energy in their variety generation of alternative options for survival might not have the longest survival worthiness of all. A variety generator (called research at many levels) that does not make believe the future always is so predictable and that working options could be the best way for us to prepare. It also might indicate a new way of organizing how we approach the built environment, whatever it is, in the same way that a plant taxonomist records the location of indigenous plant species. Just think if we could develop, as was achieved centuries ago, building forms that had some of the lasting powers of the plants around us. CARRIZO SPRINGS

Page 180

The Trickle-Type Reradiating Roof is coupled to pipes in the heat absorbing foundation slab. The performance of the roof depends on the ability of white painted corrugated roof metal to reradiate and evaporate the water trickling over it at night. This water is then cycled through pipes in the slab foundation. The performance also depends on how many BTU s per square foot of roof area the night sky is able to absorb. In the building area, this roof is able to lose approximately 100 BTU’s per square foot of roof, which is approximately equivalent to the heat gain of a well insulated building. Bamboo in our demonstration area can be grown along the banks of rivers to make use of runoff. Planting bamboo in other locales would require water which is presently being used at five times its natural replenishment rate. Therefore, our map shows only rivers being used for growth areas in the study area. The bamboo must be cut as close as possible to its dormant season in order to reduce the amount of water in its stems. Bamboo is capable of withstanding 28,000 pounds per square inch in tension and is stabilized with asphalt emulsion before being placed in cement or calcrete. No stems beyond 3/4” diameter are used. When the diameter is greater than 3/4,” the bamboo reed is split. Mesquite is a hardwood that grows prolifically in this border region. Our organization has organized community wide gathering efforts of mesquite to be used as firewood in six low-income rural towns in South Texas. At 13,200 BTU per pound, mesquite makes about the best charcoal in the U.S. and is an extremely hardwood, comparable to mahogany. We have incorporated tbs wood in two ways within this building: 1) as a floor tile and 2) as a material base for insulating sawdust block (since sawdust is a highly available waste material in the region). The tiles are made by using the rough cutting capability of a local mesquite sawmill and a bandsaw that slices 6 x6 x2 1/2 pieces into 1/2’ tile. The completed sawdust block weighs about one-third less than caliche block, which weighs about twenty pounds per 8” x 10” x 31/2”. Cedar is located outside our study area and would be considered a product that must be brought in from a neighboring bioregion. The cedar is required because the local mesquite tree rarely grows straight and does not produce good lumber whereas cedar is the material in closest proximity which can be used to fulfill structural uses. Iron Ore is another material requiring importation since it is crucial for the building’s roof system to operate well. This metal drops temperatures quickly and then conducts the temperature efficiently to the water flowing over its surface.

Page 181

COOLING USING RERADIATING ROOF 40 CISTERN SIZING 10 48 percent drouaht Btu’s/sq.ft CALICHE MESQUITE POZZOLAN CEMENT CORRUG ATED IRON ROOF CALICHE MASS BEARING YALL SOLAR GREEN HOUSE FOR DIRECT SOLAR GAIN IN YINTER YHITE MET AL NOCTURNALLY RE-RADIATING ROOF FOR COOLING CISTERN 20%t crowncover BAMBOO TRUSS BAMBOO FOR CULTIVATION IRON RE-BAR REINFORCING IRON ORE CEDAR NON ROTTING CEDAR POSTS MESQUITE FLOOR TILE LOY ENERGY POZZOLAN CEMENT

Page 182

STABILIZED LIME PAINT CORRUGATED IRON IRON REINFORCED CONCRETE UNTEL GALVANIZED IRON FLASHING GALVANIZED IRON GUTTER CEDAR CROSS LINTEL POST OAK DOWEL JOINT MESQUrTE PLATE POST OAK DOWEL JOINT BAMBOO TRELLIS SHADING VINE 9 LIME IRON ORE IRON WOODBAMBOO MESQUITEPOST OAK CALICHE CEDAR MORNING GLORY WHFTE CORRUGATED METAL COLLECTS DEW BAMBOO REINFORCED CALICHE LINTEL GUTTER TO CATCH EARLY MORNING DEW BAMBOO TRELLIS FOR SHADING VINES PLANTER BOX FOR VINES COLLECTS WATER FROM GUTTER ROT RESISTANT MESQUrTE PLANKS FOR PLANTER CEDAR CROSSPIECE TO HOLD BAMBOO CALICHE BLOCK FOR STRUCTURE AND MASS MESQUnE SAWDUST BLOCK FOR EXTERIOR INSULATION

Page 183

‘W The next building component, our window wall unit, has an area resource pattern generation similar to the building shell. The only major difference is our dew catchment technique over the vines which is used to water the plants for the purpose of shading the windows. This technology is useful only in coastal and near coastal regions where water vapor is high enough in the early morning hours to collect as condensation on surfaces that can cool to the night sky. This system could be considered not to be of particular significance until one calculates the heat gain on the east and west sides of a structure. The predictable use of a natural shade becomes very important. Other than this, there are minor changes in the use of materials (mesquite, for example, is now the material for the planter box due to its resistance to rot, bamboo is used again as reinforcing materials in cantilever lintels and also as a trellis for the vines). To envision a future for indigenous building materials, there must be sufficient evidence that the emerging state of the art technologies form practical, immediate solutions while solving basic problems that previous attempts have been unable to do. Our success in Texas leads us to believe that indigenous materials hold just such a promise. Ready material availability, low energy cost, simplicity of equipment, and flexibility in production rates give indigenous materials a pretty rosy future.

Page 184

With primary funding from The Meadows Foundation, the Laredo Demonstration “Blueprint” Farm was conceived as an integrated regional response to building, infrastructure, materials, and agriculture and as a foundation for local economic development. Coordinated with the Texas Department of Agricultures Texas- Israel Exchange under the leadership of Texas Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower, the Farm challenged agricultural convention in Texas, where, as in many U.S. States, the economic viability of farming is threatened. The importance of the built form to reinforce the water efficient farming practices being introduced by Israeli agriculturalists was determined to be an essential component to this demonstration project. While often overlooked as integral to efficient farming practices, the built environment can lend enormous support to ensure the farm’s maximum output and resource utilization To this end, the Farm was designed as a prototype building system consistent with the quest for a resource efficient, highly productive and sustainable agricultural approach for Texas farms. By incorporating earthen, agricultural by-products and locally available materials for building, shade for cooling, water catchment systems for irrigation, and solar systems for space and water heating and space cooling, the Farm’s physical structure is a statement of how farmers across the state can overcome challenging operations and maintenance concerns lessening reliance on water and fossil fuel- derived energy sources and extending the growing season by introducing shade to crop producing fields. 1988 LOCATION: Laredo, Texas CLIENT: Laredo Junior College; Texas Department of Agriculture FUNDING: The Meadows Foundation; State of Texas Governor’s Energy Office; Texas Department of Agriculture PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III (architectural and agricultural systems); Josef Farbiarz (engineering); Steve Gerdes; Tom Glassford; Alberto Luera (community liaison); Tom Morris (site foreman); Tony Ramirez (agricultural systems); Laredo Junior College Construction Department, W. Laurence Doxsey, Rich MacMath, Ray Zamora (construction) A Sustainable Farm Demanstratian for the State of Texas (1989) Because of the extraordinary breadth covered in farm . operations, a demonstration “blueprint” farm must bridge a tremendous number of issues, both now and in the future, like no other type of demonstration can or should. The Center’s participation in the Laredo Demonstration Farm covers the general field of sustainable development with specific applications in the farm’s buildings, field support systems, and other infrastructure elements, and attempts to bridge the social and technical aspects of sustainable agriculture. By admitting state of the art theories being raised in many disciplines, from biology and physics to philosophy and politics, we are, in short, attempting to guide the Laredo Demonstration Farm towards what we believe to be the key elements of the future of sustainable farming in Texas and elsewhere. Farming is a solar energy system that contains within its working parts performance issues such as efficiencies of scale, long versus short term economics, embodied versus operating energy costs and other issues akin to the solar technical community. Unlike most solar activity, however, farming embraces more solar-related businesses than all other solar businesses combined, perhaps excepting the lumber industry, which is in a similar league of production capacity. Since so much attention is placed on this particular solar business — not, mind you, as a solar business per se but rather as a mainstay of the national economy — virtually every facet of farming’s operational, social, economic, and environmental aspects have undergone careful scrutiny, perhaps more than with any other renewable energy business. LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM ©

Page 186

HYACINTH REGIONALLOCAL INTERNATIONAL WIND POWER RON ORF 0 0 DEMONSTRATION OUTREACH INFORMATION HAI JIAIIt )M STRAW UME DOWNDRAFT TOWFR SAMbUU RIO GRANDE RIVER WIND-GROW COMPOSTING ORGANIC SOLID WASTE STOCKPILE AGRO-FORESTRY AREA NORTHERN VARIETY AVACAOO TREES 0 40 KW WINO WATER PUMPING I FARM INSEOTUARY SLUDGE THICKENING CISTERNS CONTINUOUS SHADE DIRECT GAIN MAIN OFFTCE SOLAR DRYER SOLAR ZEOLITE REFRIGERATION DOWN DRAFT COOLING TOWERS STRAW BALE PACKING SHED RECYCLED OIL RIG DRILLING STEM ^2 WATER TREATMENT WETLAND MARSH SEDIMENTATK)N POND BATCH SOLAR WATER GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP Due to the nature of physical resources, we find that, unlike information, the distance between a resources’ point of origin and the farm site is critical. Our approach scans resource needs beginning with the farm itself, progressing to the adjacent urban area, and finally moves to more rural conditions depending on the resource type, e.g. climatically-based, organic-based, mineral-based, soil-based. We approach all sectors of the farming process in this manner, including buildings, water, soils, and fertilizers. Crop choices ore made based on their ability to retoin genetic diversity within the region coupled with their ability to thrive on little else but the regions available solar radiation, precipitation, good soil, and other physical and human resources.

Page 187

PURE WATER DRIED FISH, FRurrs, & VEGETABLES DRYING LIQUID WASTE THE CITY THE FARM :^E-tiiI=I;I?I °,4°X= COOKING Nl^ilXTb -OOD REFRIGERATED ORGANIC VEGETABLES & FRUITS NTEN CARBON FIBER TRACE ELEMENTS COMPOSTING! JAHHEU HONEY SOME PRODUCE USED BY LAREDO JUNIOR COLLEGE FISH FOOD INING WATFR NITROGEN I-O0D FOOD HOT WATER PICKLING PICKLED PRODUCTS Sustainable agricultural planning is accomplished by relating the farm to an information field comprised of its regionally-based human and physical resources and by relating these resources to a particular need as thoroughly as possible. An overall action plan is used based on observing the region and documenting experiences of people who already (knowingly or unknowingly) have used sustainable methods as inherent parts of their particular techniques. The information field can be extended beyond a local and regional basis to include a global geographically similar condition within which experiences over history have produced knowledgeable people. The importance of bridging farming processes with the city will become more apparent as the costs of transportation, chemical fertilizers, storage, and packaging begin to catch up to their real energy costs. The fact that farming currently benefits from heavily subsidized coal, oil, gas, and nuclear industries whose costs therefore are not representative of their values over time, places conventional agriculture on a false basis of productive efficiency. Small, intensive production, and low energy farming adjacent to the city must occur and the proper value of good agricultural land for such purposes acknowledged. For example, the coupling of sewage nutrients from non-industrial uses needs to be monitored and reused not only for its nutrient value, but also for its water value. Similarly, the importance of solid organic wastes recycled as compost is paramount for the future of farming. Institutions, research labs, and practitioners form (or can form) international, regional, and local knowledge networks related to the particular issues of semi-arid agriculture. Using this knowledge network, we find, for instance, shade techniques used in virtually every advanced arid to semi-arid setting, the nearest being approximately 100 miles south, in Mexico, where an entire orchard is covered with a continuous shade system. In Arizona, we find ancient Persian downdraft chimneys in use with agriculture. In Central Texas, amazingly successful no-water organic farming methods relying on tremendous amounts of organic compost and mulch are applied to the soil year-round. We also find a few examples of highly innovative low energy, water, and sewage treatment methods, including two towns with experience using vermiculture (earthworm) waste treatment and several towns using aquatic treatment (hyacinth). In Texas, approximately eighty organic farmers are going through the organic certification process, many of whom are knowledgeable of farming systems such as bio-intensive techniques, permqculture, or agroforestry methods. In one sense, then, a demonstration farm can be viewed as a catalyst for better communicating this knowledge field — a place to bring into a region state of the art information gleaned from this particular knowledge field.

Page 188

SPREADER STABILIZED EAFTTH ROAD BUILDING USING UME OR FLY ASH RAMMED EARTH WALLS --------SIFTER AND ADOBE BLOCK MANUFACTURING PROTECTIVE COVER SYSTEM AND BUILDING SUPERSTRUCTURE PROTECTS FROM HAILPROTECTS FROM WIND STRUCTURES FOR VINES AND BIRD HABITATS FRONT END _ LOADER STRAW BALE WALLS WHEN COMBINED WITH — BAILER - CHICKEN WIRE AND LIME STUCCO ____POST HOLE ______HOLES FOR SHADE DIGGER POLES AND FENCES WINDROWS DOUBLE AS — COMPOST -------INTENSIVE BEDS AFTER TURNER CURING — t!S^^ -------EARTH BLOCK MACHINES TAKE PROTECTS YOUNG PLANTS FROM EXCESSIVE SUN DURING SUMMER REDUCES WATER CONSUMPTION UP TO 60% SEPARATES IRRIGATION LINES FROM CULTIVATION STRUCTURES FOR OVERHEAD VINES ENCLOSURES FOR BENEACIAL INSECTS AND BIRDS REDUCES TEMPERATURE STRESS FROM 10-15°F USE OF COLOR SHADING CAN ENHANCE PLANT GROWTH UP TO 20% PROTECTS PLANTS FROM FREEZING BY BLOCKING NIGHT SKY RERADIATION POLES USED AS STRUCTURAL BASE FOR SCREEN HOUSE PROTECTIVE STRUCTURE CAN BE EFFECTIVELY USED FOR INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE SUCH AS BIO-INTENSIVE GARDENING AND PERMACUL- TURE CAGES POLE CABLE SYSTEM USED AS SUPPORT FOR LOW COST FABRIC STRUCTURES TO HOUSE: PLANTS

• GREENHOUSE
• SOLAR DRYER ANIMALS
• CHICKENS
• DUCKS -TURKEYS
• GEESE
• RABBITS
• PIGS -LAMBS
• GOATS
• CATTLE POLE SYSTEM USED AS BUILDING ROOF SUPPORT FOR
• PACKING SHEDS
• BARNS
• MAINTENANCE
• OFFICES On the farm, a high degree of coordination between activities must occur in order to optimize energy, materials, and labor. Multi-use and sharing of implements and structures, development of beneficial relationships of many kinds between plants and animals, the use of aromatic flowers to camouflage smells while providing honey, flowers for food and for nutrients for beneficial insects, vines for shade and for harboring beneficial birds (all going under the auspices of integrated pest management) should also occur. The nature of this activity largely depends on the evolution of knowledge developed by the farmer and a willingness to actively experiment and use one’s imagination. The Farm’s extensive shade system, a principal design element, is built over a series of 30’ x 30’ x 24’ units, within which a variety of farming activities occur. The three dimensionality of the environment enables many plant and animal species to thrive at all elevation levels. In this way, for example, beneficial insects are surrounded by a protective envelope and birds are kept in a protective aviary surrounding the plant environment. This envelope (light filter, plant trellises, variable shade cloth, bird netting) becomes part of an integrated pest management system, as well as a micro-climatic environment suitable for plant growth in this semi-arid region. The three dimensional units can be the basis for an input/output simulation process that can be analytically applied to the farm so that the major flows of materials and energy can be directed within the farm and with the farm’s connectivity to the adjacent urban environment. The farm, however, is not completely ‘modelable’ in the classic sense. Some units receive primary inputs from the City of Laredo or the Laredo Junior College campus where the farm is located. Waste units, in particular, become bridges to the adjacent campus environment, providing a critical connection between the city and farm. Topsoil is one of the most needed resources in any semi-arid environment. Earthworms are increasingly being demonstrated as a low energy, effective method for converting various organic wastes (food processing waste, municipal garbage, and animal manures) into organic fertilizers. Expertise in Texas was developed to handle municipal sewage in the late seventies. It was shown that clean sewage sludge can be processed at the rate of 6,000 persons per acre of worm beds using 12,000 pounds of red wriggle worms. It has been demonstrated that vermicompost can supply all the trace elements and phosphate necessary for plants as long as one trace element does not exceed toxicity limits of the plants being grown. Earthworms at this density per acre will supply fifty tons of compost per year as long as the worms are kept within a 54° to 84°F range using solar input and simple greenhouse cover during winter months. To serve the waste needs of the 250 dormitory students housed at Laredo Junior College, approximately two 30’ x 30’ module units are required, producing about two tons of compost per year. Other units become examples of state of the art organic growing practices. Four units (3,600 square feet) are for an anaerobic/aerobic compost module which will produce approximately four tons of compost per day from the cafeteria waste of 6,000 students. Fourteen units, representing 12,600 square feet, use bio-intensive methods following Jeavons’ methods (equivalent to about nine acres of conventional farming) which can support the organic vegetable needs of a population of about 200 to 300 people. Two units equivalent tol,800 square feet, about the size of a single-family home’s backyard, are reserved for multi- canopy permaculture techniques and should provide enough food for several families. Three units are reserved for specialty crop growing on a vertical tube growing stand filled with organic soil. During summer months, these tubes and the greenhouse that surrounds them are converted to an 1,800 square foot solar air heater that is operated with a fan so that hot air can be blown into the drying chamber for drying the previous season’s crops. This component is one of several demonstrations showing the very small farmer how to increase profit by adding value to the crop. The dryer will dry up to a half ton of produce a day and, in real conditions, could be a paying business just for drying during summer months, thus giving season spread to the small farmers’ capability. Three units are used as a seedling area for field type organic farming interspersed with fruit trees for shading. Three units are used for the packing shed. The building is efficiently cooled using downdraft evaporative cooling towers modeled after those in the mid-East and is built with plastered straw bale walls, a folded sheet metal roof, and stabilized earth floors.

Page 191

PACKING SHED USING DOWN DRAFT EVAPORATIVE COOLING UPDRAFT THERMAL CHIMNEY STRAW BALE STUCCO WALLS STABILIZED EARTH FLOOR RECYCLED OIL DRILLING ROD POLES COOLING / REFRIGERATION

• DOWN DRAFT EVAPORATIVE COOUNG TOWERS
• NON-FREON 11 OR 12 BASED ZEOLTTE REFRIGERATION -40% AND HIGH SHADE TO REDUCE OPEN SPACE TEMPERATURE SHADE SYSTEM
• ULTRA VIOLET PROTECTION
• TEMPERATURE AND WATER REDUCTION
• HAIL AND NIGHT TIME RERADIATION PROTECTION
• BASIC pRooucTivrrr of people animals, and plants WATER CATCHMENT/ GROUND WATER REPLENISHMENT
• CISTERNS -PERMEABLE PAVING
• SEDIMENTATION PONDS
• DRIP IRRIGATION LOW ENERGY MATERIALS
• RECYCLED OIL WELL DRILLING STEM
• LOW WEIGHT STEEL TRUSSES
• RECYCLED OR FARM DERIVED BUILDING MATERIALS
• TINSEL STEEL CABLE STRUCTURES WASTE ANO WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS -SEWAGE TREATING GREENHOUSES
• COMPOST SYSTEM FOR SOUD WASTE -SOLAR OPERATED OZONE TREATMENT The Laredo Demonstration Farm’s initial needs include support structures for storing equipment, sheds for packing vegetables, food storage sheds and silos, food preserving areas, dryers, water holding cisterns and ponds, stable road and flooring surfaces, offices, and living quarters. Today, it is rare that these facilities are supplied by the farm itself. Instead, they are supplied by specialty businesses within the neighboring town or city, either as a pre-manufactured item or as a business that supplies these services. However, as one investigates the actual availability of these items, one finds tremendous dependency on energy intensive transport from areas, sometimes as high as thousands of miles away. To develop added value to locally-based goods and services on or near the farm site means more money in the farmers’ pocket, thus the term added value. This is true as much for produce as it is for the structures. There are five basic material systems used on the Demonstration Farm: biologic, mineral, soil, recycled, and high efficiency ratios of strength to weight. While most structural members are made of metal, usually associated with energy-intensive building, it should be noted that the south Texas region does not produce any lumberable wood. The metal that is used is in some instances recycled oil field poles or is thin folded sheet metal made into structural components, an extremely efficient use of the material. At one level, the Farm was developed in a three dimensional manner responding primarily to the effects of light and wind in this semi-arid environment borrowed from a long, global history of arid-land farming. The shade, in part, is meant to make the City of Laredo think of itself as part of a major trend that will continue to grow and which holds importance to the viability of open space, streets, parking areas, etc,, as in many ancient cities. At another level, the pole and cable system offers a haven for nature’s protective ways to be managed and used in simple, low energy farming and becomes the predominant superstructure for all Farm activities. As such, the Farm’s physical structure addresses many issues of future farming practice close to urban environments in our part of the world.

Page 194

.The Texas “Recycled Content” / Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home Project (1995) The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home Project’s objective is to introduce communities to a range of “green” housing materials and methods, emphasizing opportunities for recycled-content and by-product based construction materials. The project is supported by several state, regional, and municipal agencies. As such, it reflects a regional process, as open to adaptation to a region’s natural resources as it is to its peoples. 1995 LOCATION: Austin, Texas CLIENT: Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems FUNDING: City of Austin; The Educational Foundation of America; The Meadows Foundation, Lower Colorado River Authority; Texas Governor s Energy Office; Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission On-Site Wastewater Treatment Council; The Vervane Foundation; The Warren Skaaren Foundation and 31 corporate matches in products and materials PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III (design); Benjamin Obregon (architect of record); Michael Gatto (fly ash concrete engineer); Susan Parten (on-site wastewater treatment system); Gail Vittori (project administration); Lucia Athens and Chad McKinney, Sally Struble (landscape); Jesus Bendezu, Simon Couchman, Dickson Fogelman, David Hsu, Tara Keairnes, Paul Kouri, Jeff Kruse, Peter Lohmann, Greg Jackson, Anthony. McKenzie, Randall Notgrass, Brian O’Brien, Cordula Oel, Kevin John Richardson, Peter Struble, Clarke Snell, Jim Walker (construction) The design is specifically intended to bridge issues of social and family concerns such as affordability, expandability, and economic development. This is a result of a modular-based design framework, coupled with reliance on environmentally- conscious regional manufacture of by-product based materials. Environmental issues are addressed by establishing a user for pollutants considered major contributors to global concerns of acid rain (due to release of sulphur dioxide), global warming (due to release of carbon dioxide) and deforestation. The homes will be built without virgin wood products or portland cement. The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems initiated a sustainable rating program, in partnership with The City of Austin, in 1990. The program, now called “The Green Builder Program,” was honored at the 1992 Earth Summit. It extends the City’s successful “Energy Star Program” to include water, solid waste, and building materials. By using a life cycle assessment (LCA), the new rating procedure establishes a link between how each resource category relates to the region’s resource base. This procedure tracks the “life” of a product through the stages of sourcing, manufacture, use, and, finally, reuse, recycle, or disposal. It enables an understanding of environmental impacts at every stage of its “life” and has been adopted in scientific circles to better understand the relationship between resource use and environmental impacts. The success of the Green Builder Program is evidenced by the increasing number of builders, manufacturers, and vendors wanting to enter the “green” marketplace. The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home is a physical manifestation of the range of design methods and materials advocated by the Green Builder Program. ADVANCED GREEN BUILDER DEMONSTRATION HOME

Page 196

CLIMATIC PRODUCTS BUSINESS RESOURCE WATER CONSERVATION BUSINESS RESOURCE CLIMATIC REGIONAL RESOURCE o 67° GROUND TEMPERATURE .k 68° GROUND TEMPERATURE O 69° GROUND TEMPERATURE SOLAR HEAT / COOL

• SOLAR RADIATION
• NOCTURNAL RERADIATION -VENTURI SHAPE WIND CATCHMENT
• SOLAR SHADE TRELUS
• SHADE PLANT BED
• SOLAR WATER HEATING
• DIRECT AND INDIRECT SOLAR DEHUMIDIFICATION
• HEAT EXCHANGER
• THERMAL WALL STORAGE
• WATER THERMAL STORAGE BUILDING MATERIALS BUSINESS RESOURCE NATIVE PLANT BUSINESS RESOURCE POTENTIAL WATER REGIONAL RESOURCE WATER HARVEST
• PRECIPITATION
• ROOFING
• GUTTERING
• PHYSICAL FILTRATION
• BIOLOGICAL PURIFICATION
• NONTOXIC PIPING
• STORAGE TANKS MATERIAL REGIONAL RESOURCE VEGETATIVE REGIONAL RESOURCE ■ 32” ANNUAL PRECIPITATION 7j 33” ANNUAL PRECIPITATION r^ 34” ANNUAL PRECIPrTATION 35” ANNUAL PRECIPrTATION C7 LIMESTONE BEDROCK .CHALK Ei CALCRETE NEAR SURFACE LIGNITE DEEP BASIN LIGNrrE MATERIALS
• NATIVE HARDWOODS
• NATIVE SOFTWOODS
• GRASSLAND PLANTS
• FLY ASH CEMENT
• COAL ASH AGGREGATE
• ORGANIC WASTE PRODUCTS — ORGANIC FIBER PANELS
• SULFUR — CALCAREOUS & LOAM MATERIALS
• RECYCLED STEEL POST OAK SAVANNAH ■ BACKLAND PRAIRIES CROSS TIMBERS AND PRAIRIES EDWARDS PLATEAU WASTEWATER LANDSCAPE
• ULTRA LOW WATER AND COMPOST TOILETS — LOW WATER APPLIANCES
• GRAY/BLACKWATER PIPING
• GRAY/BLACKWATER TANKS — PHOTOVOLTAIC PLUMBING
• WASTEWATER LAWNS
• UVING FENCE ORGANIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT
• GREYWATER FED AGRO FORESTRY
• HERBAL LAWN GARDEN SOLAR ELECTRICS -SUN
• PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS
• HYBRID ELECTRIC CAR AUXILIARY
• LOW VOLTAGE WIRING
• LOW VOLTAGE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
• LOW VOLTAGE APPLIANCES
• NATURAL & LOW ENERGY UGHTING
• BATTERY STORAGE

Page 197

The demonstration building goes beyond singularly focused environmental issues by purposely bridging social and environmental concerns and by becoming a catalyst for evaluating the ways in which architecture can impact the problems of affordable housing through efficient building practices; outgrowing a home by incorporating spatial flexibility to enable the home to respond to a family’s changing spatial needs; economic development by supporting regional businesses, manufacturers, and vendors of “green” products; and environmental issues associated with sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide emissions by providing sinks. As important as understanding how to design around these significant issues is understanding how to communicate the approach. As a result, a sustainable design vocabulary is being developed that is able to link what are often disparate issues with a new set of “building blocks.” These building blocks relate to all scales of sustainable design, from planning neighborhoods to urban and rural areas. The language methodology uses the life cycle assessment as its basic framework. Three basic macro trends provide the cornerstones of the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home: global, regional, and urban environment conditions. Each of these scales relate to imbalances in particular metabolic conditions. One cause of this is inappropriate use of natural resources; a second is an absence of looping by-products back into production, resulting in what is generally termed pollution. The AGBDH demonstrates how the adoption of specific materials and methods could substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the built environment. As a single source, the production of portland cement is responsible for 2.4% of global warming. The AGBDH replaces portland cement with an almost 100% coal fly ash cement and restricts its use to applications which will not compromise human health. Sulphur, another by-product from coal-burning plants, is used as a binder for concrete masonry units (CMUs). In its elemental form, sulphur is benign (and is edible). In its gaseous form, however, such as SO2 emissions from coal burning plants, sulphur is poisonous and causes the condition known as acid rain. Acid rain destroys forests, lakes, and buildings and is responsible for as many as 60,000 deaths a year in the U.S. caused by lung cancer. As industrial by-products, both coal-derived fly ash and sulphur have low embodied energy because no additional energy is expended in their production. Integrating passive solar design features and the use of these low-energy materials results in low operational energy costs for the building. As a result, the buildings overall contribution to global warming is significantly reduced and is even enhanced by the landscape design.

Page 198

AIR RESOURCE ENERGY METHANE AIR SOURCE ENERGY PVS FOOD SOURCE POULTRY FOOD SOURCE AQUA­ CULTURE ENERGY SOURCE PASSIVE SOLAR FOOD SOURCE GARDEN WATER RESOURCE HYACINTH WATER RESOURCE WETLAND WATER RESOURCE -ORFST FOOD SOURCE GRAZING FOOD RESOURCE COMPOST MATERIAL STRAW MATERIAL EARTH WATER SOURCE Regional area resources are defined as two types: those which are available in abundant quantities, such as certain soil types, and renewable resources, such as high yielding crops, that can be grown in three seasons and, with proper crop rotations, do not deplete arable soils. Use of regional resources within the region from which they are derived reflects well on their life cycle assessment, since transportation costs are lessened, and the distance between source and sink is reduced. Thus, overall production is efficient and lends itself to be balanced with the region’s ecological land planning. This junction between ecological and economic planning becomes linkable again through the use of a life cycle assessment “ladder,” through which regional sources are mappable entities subject to planning procedures. In turn, these resources become the basis for job production in the building materials, water, waste, and climate-control manufacturing sector. The combination of a regions virgin and by-product resources resulting from urbanization introduces an entirely new product potential. This resulting building approach is referred to as a regionalized building system. Inventorying existing and potential by-product reuse opportunities can result in a resource base at least as diverse as that offered by virgin resources. Moreover, the resulting pool of resources (combining virgin and by-product sources) achieves an enhanced level of building technology that is more technically sophisticated and ecologically benign than that which relies solely on virgin materials. This especially applies to those virgin materials that come from highly concentrated sources that use extensive processing energy and the dependence on enormous resources as a result of their transportation requirements. Planning by-product resources in this way is often referred to as “industrial ecology” which becomes the urban facsimile of “ecological land planning” on a regional scale. This new perspective on urban planning involves a systematic reconceptualization of how to balance a region s waste and virgin resources within the context of the region’s carrying capacity. This process is constantly evolving as a result of an enhanced knowledge base. The new technologies and refined identification of technology-associated problems resulting from this enhanced knowledge form the basis of the balancing procedure which, when acknowledged and worked with, becomes a balance of dynamic equilibrium. The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home is a time fractal of this process.

Page 199

0^ K’ 3 $ In healthy systems, sectors of producers, consumers, and recyclers each have equal but distinct roles. Only in “bloom populations,” or those in which one sector dominates all others, is this balance disturbed. The disruption is often the result of an overabundance of a given resource, such as has been created by petroleum in human systems for much of the twentieth century. The imbalance in human systems is partially a result from over-dependence on petroleum resources. The presence of pollution can reflect a lack of effectiveness in the recycling sector, manifested by a physical lack of opportunities, or by a cost accounting system that fails to factor in environmental costs or externalities. An enhanced recycling sector should reflect well on the long-term health of the economy. The number of transformations, from initial sourcing through to use, influences the efficiency of delivery. This phenomenon is summarized by saying that the overall energy efficiency is the arithmetic product of the conversion efficiencies at each stage. For example, the difference between three, five, and seven transformations in the LCA ladder (assuming equal efficiencies in each) is 0.34, 0.17, and 0.08. As one can see, there is more than four times the efficiency between steps three and seven. The basis for supporting a regional building system approach lies in both increased efficiency, as skills are learned and re-learned, and increased knowledge facilitating the understanding of a range of indigenous potentials. When this is achieved at the level of virgin and by-product sources, the energetics of the delivery system improves and jobs are increased due to the diversity of potential products resulting from overlapping systems. The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home emphasizes this diversity potential and the resulting limit of the number of steps in the life cycle chain. Even though we often refer to material cycles and keep these cycles going (given that integration is fundamentally a more important resource conservation concept than conservation), the entire production sequence is “captured” from raw material through to final product. When this capturing takes place, (i.e, all sourcing, transporting, processing, manufacturing, using, and reusing steps occur within a region’s boundaries), the job multiplier is increased. Approximately sixty percent of the nation’s wastewater treatment plants do not meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards; five to nine percent of gas flowing through the nation’s pipelines leaks in the form of methane, which some believe to be a more significant contributor to global warming than industrial sources of carbon dioxide; water pumped from slow recharge aquifers to meet the water needs of some of the nation’s largest urban areas indicates an unstable resource future, particularly in the southwest.

Page 200

THE ADVANCED GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION VISITORS CENTER EXMOmON ENTRANCE► MEALS ON WHEELS KITCHEN FLEKIOLE ROOM FLEXIDLE ROOM DISAPPEARING TABLE PCTHANCE PATH WITH PHOTOVOLTAICS ABOVE BUFFET CONFIGURATION h INDOOn7 * KITCHENI , CONFIGURATION FLEXIBLE PRESENTATION ROOM The Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home, with the assistance of regional and local agencies, presents a miniaturization of sustainable infrastructure systems. These include: • An on-site rainwater catchment system, designed to provide for 100% of the home’s domestic water needs. Recent studies by Texas A&M University have determined that the potential exists in central and east Texas for a standard home to provide for all its water needs by capturing rainwater from the roof. This potential is realized by utilizing water conserving fixtures and recycling and reuse techniques. In addition to a cistern attached to the house, a pond serves as additional cistern capacity and also functions as a lap pool, fish pond, and heat sink for the heat pump. • An on-site black and grey water treatment system, with the treated water reused for plant and animal production. The wastewater treatment system, for example, will be designed as a low-pressure dosing system. Designed in collaboration with the Austin-Travis County Health Department, the system requires little energy input and is the excuse to plant a living fence on the property, which, in addition to metabolizing the grey and black water, provides privacy, security, and a haven for wildlife. • On-site renewable energy systems for heating, cooling, electricity, and transportation. The structures’ roofs are reradiating to the north and absorptive to the south, incorporating simple technologies for chilling and heating water. Depending on the season, the roofs are connected to the cistern water and counteract heat pump temperature variation. There are sometimes conflicts between using by-products to relieve environmental stresses and the consequent impact of these uses on human health. Conversely, some of the materials and methods acknowledged as appropriate for “healthy homes” have been demonstrated to have disastrous consequences for the planet’s environmental well-being. Fly ash from coal-burning plants can possess radiation levels considered dangerous for human exposure, depending on the source of coal. Similarly, high radiation levels are also found in some samples of portland cement, granite, and soil, oil having uses in conventional construction practices. Because of the particular concerns raised about fly ash and an uncertainty as to the specific consequences of long-term, low-dose exposure to radiation-emitting building materials in interior environments, the use of fly ash is limited to non-contact surfaces such as columns and beams which are permanently sealed from exposure to people. Fly ash will not be used in slabs. As a further safeguard, fly ash samples will be tested for radiation prior to use.

Page 201

ENTRANCE ► k<EALS 0N WHEELS KTTCHEN l FLEXIBLE PRESENIATION nooM ENTRANCE PATH WTTH PHOTOVOLTAICS ABOVE I U THE ADVANCED GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION VISITORS CENTER FLEXIBLE BUILDING SYSTEM ENTRANCE » BATHROOM CONFIGURATIONS MEALS ON । WHEELSKfTCH£N THE ADVANCED GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION VISITORS CENTER : ENTRANCE PATH WTTH — PHOTOVOLTAICS

• ABOVE DISAFPEARNO TABLE PRESENTATON ROOM ENTRANCE ► T FLEXIBLE STUDIO/LIVING MEALS ON WHEELS KTTCHEN DISAPPEARING TABLE FLEXIOLE PRESENTATION ROOM THE ADVANCED GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION VISITORS CENTER ENTRANCE PATH WTTH PHOTOVOLTAICS ABOVE ENTRANCED tt 1 FLEXIBLE PRESENTATION ROOM ENTRANCE PATH WTTH PMOTOVOUAICS ABOVE 41 THE ADVANCED GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION VISITORS CENTER WATER SYSTEM

Page 202

intii imiiuij4 FLEXIBLE BATHROOM 2 FLEXIBLE KrrCHEN FLEXIBLE ROOM FLEXIBLE ROOM BI RI 11111111IlliiiiHiiiiiiHiiiiii।

Page 203

As we approach the twenty-first century, demographic trends point to dynamic changes relative to family size and needs. However, design methodologies have remained static, making it difficult to “grow” a house once the initial structure has been built. Few building systems have been designed for ease of expansion by owners or small contractors. By following a grid that becomes responsive to a wide range of pro-manufactured panels, or to the use of indigenous infill materials, the AGBDH building system is intended to sustain the family’s life over time. The modular components are designed for ease of use by an owner-builder, being lightweight (about twenty pounds), and able to be stacked without mortar. Additionally, the modular units can be formed together to create a foundation in which column or beam forms are poured into for a sturdy post and beam framework. A variety of applications are being developed, based on the LCA ladder. These applications fall within the framework of a sustainable design process. The process is based on icons, or symbolic pictures, of processes and products sequenced together in the LCA format. Connections to the region, and interconnections among each other, are significant in terms of sustainability. The spatial conditions of resources, for example, can be identified by tracking back to the “source.” How the components fit together becomes a conceptual model for the building elements and their connectivity to each other and their region. The clustering of icon ladders form major building blocks similar to the sectors discussed in natural systems. In this way, sources, processes, and sink (or reuse) conditions are accounted for within the building, neighborhood, or urban context. These clusters include all metabolic components and view the building as an organism responsible for heating, cooling, cleansing, treating waste, producing food, providing water, and more.

Page 210

Located on Magdaleno Bay bordering Puerto Son Carlos on the west coast of the Baja Peninsula, the School for Field Studies’ Center for Coastal Studies represents a deep investigation of self-reliance in coastal conditions. The initial master planning ensured that the cabins for faculty and staff were oriented to take advantage of the cooling breezes; earthen and bio-based construction materials were derived from the region; and, significantly, a salt-water based ________________________________________________ ____ _________________artificial wetland wastewater treatment system was installed to offset the use 1997__________________________________________________________of scarce fresh water for flushing toilets, that would have required piping from iirD । i D. 54 miles. As a prototype we realized the salt water wetlands opportunity to L exico influence the prevalent condition of coastal areas throughout the world that use NN N°C”°° °r Fie° Studies fresh potable water as a sewage conveyance medium. The prevalent global FUNDING: School for Field Studies condition of access to salt vs. fresh water should inform water use patterns, though PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III and Rich MacMath (design); Dan Schellenberg replicable examples are still all too rare even today. Master planning, design and (on-site wastewater treatment system); Solly Struble (landscape); construction oversight spanned 6 months. BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES

Page 212

^TVP^NT PW^iyiNe VNUT^ ------------
.AREA 9 UNFTS © 192 SF Cr73 SM) , UNFT TWO UNTT TYPES: ‘A* AND *8; OCCUPANCY: 4 STUDENTS / UNIT SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS 95 SF / UNTT WORKROOM (AREA 512 SF (46.1 SM) TOWER #2 / STUDENT BATHHOUSE ______________ AREA 448 SF (403 SM.) WATER TANK. 1760 GAU PLUMBING FDCTURES: 8 LAVS. 6 TOILETS. 4 SHWRS. SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS.95 SF -W^TLANP #1 TREATMENT: SALINE BLACKWATER FROM STUDENT BATHHOUSE. .AND AC BATHROOMS TREATMENT TANK AREA 320 SF (238 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH 1OO LF (3O M)X2FT WETLAND #3_____________________________ TREATT-IENT. NON-SAUNE GREYWATER FROM BATHHOUSE TREATMENT TANK AREA 320 SF (288 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH LENGTH: 1OO LF (30 M) X2 FT. WIDE OFFICES AREA 4 O96 SF (8.6 SM) PER OFFCE TOW^R HI WATER TANK: 1.760 GAL S A M./ INTERNS _______________
AREA 1008 SF (92 SM) OCCUPANCY:! MGR. 3 INTERNS SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS U25 SF PLUMBING FIXTURES: 1 LAV. 1 TLT. I BATI-VSHWR. TOWER33______________ WATER TANK: 1760 GAL

• WETLAND #2 TREATMENT: NGN-SALINE GREYWATER FROM KTTCHEN AND AC. BATHROOMS TREATMENT TANK AREA 320 SF (288 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH ICO LF (30 M) X 2FT WETLAND #4 _________________ TREATMENT: SAUNE AND NON-SAUNE GREY AND BLACKWATER FROM FACULTY LINTS TREATMENT TANK AREA 320 SF (288 SrD VEGETATION TRENCH 1OO LF (3O M)X 2 FT. &aHEQQtaa&i2 LAUNDRY AREA 384 SF (34.6 SM) PLUMBING FDCTURES: 4 LAV 4 TLTS. 2 WASHERS AREA 1344 SF (121.0 SM) OCCUPANCY. 30 -80 AREAS UNFTS © 6^0 SF (57^ SM)/UNrr OCCUPANCY: 1 - 2 PERSONS / UNTT SOLAR A-OTOVOLTACS UOS SF/UNTT PLUMBING FDCTURES. 1 LAV. 1 TLTJ BATH/SHWR PER UNFT LIBRARY AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICE. AREA 768 SF (69.1 SM) PINING HALL / KITCHEN AREA- 1.440 SF (09.6 SM) PLUMBING FIXTURES. 1 SINK ;7U^^t UNIX _______________ AREA 400 SF (350 SM) OCCUPANCY: 1 — 2 PERSONS SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS: 4.75 SF SOLAR PHCrrCN’OLTAICS 300 SF DIRECTORS RESIDENCE / AREA 1.280 SF (1153 SM) OCCUPANCY.2-4 PERSONS SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS 23 75 SF P-UMBNG FUTURES 1 LAV. 1 TLT. 1 BATH/SHWR ALL TREES SHOWN ARE EXSTING PARKING EXISTING PALAPA TOTAL BUILDING AREA (NOT INCL-UCXNG TOWERS) nC^Z&Ff^&rg

Page 213

TREATMENT NON-SaUNE BATHHOUSE G^NTSi4L-,FB^^bWie.T^F ^?/4|^p^,S LAUNDRY BATHROOMS BATHHOUSE 300 SF (270 SM) INSDE Wnn FT. WOE RETAKING WALLS DISPOSAL TRENCH. 100 LF (30 M)X 2FT WTTH SAM. / INTERN UNIT HALOPHYTE PLANT SALT WATER SUPPLY _____ SHALLOW WElA AND PUMP EXISTING STORAGE CISTERN DWELLING LINTS FACULTY UNITS (21 WETLAND M2 TREATMENT NON-SAUNE WETLAND U4 KTTCHEN. LAUNDRY. AND AXTURES .%iioa£ DIRECTORS RESIDENCE GUEST UNIT AND FACULTY UNIT SALINE BLACK AND GREYWATERGREYWATER■ …SLLFACULTY UNITS (2) — DISPOSAL TRENCH WTTH PERFORATED PRECENTRAL HALOPHTYE PLANT GARDEN ________ SALINE BLACKWATER SALTWA-ER SUPPLY FRESH WATER /ZETLAND ^1 .SSGUL 77 ’^/^^^Clf i<ETAlNNG WALLS DISPOSAL TRENCH LENGTH 1OO LF (EO M) X 2 FT. WOE WITH PERFORATED PRE AT CENTRAL FRESHWATER GARDEN AND PALM TREE IRRIGATON SALINE .AND NON-SALINE GREY AND BLACKWATER FROM FACULTY UNITS ANO SAM,TNTERN UNIT 7 LAVS. 7 B4TH,SHOV^ERS. ANO 7 TOILERS SEPTO TANK: 1.000 Gal TREATMENT TANK AREA. 300 SF (27.0 SM) INSIDE RETAINING WALLS DISPOSAL TRENCH. lOO LF (30 M) X 2 FT. Wrrri^ PERFORATED PRE at CENTRAL HALOPHYTE PLANT GARDEN SALT WATER SETTLING TANK .ai SALT WATER .V WETLAND BACKISH WATER SETTLING TANK Fa>^’, BACKISH WATER *32 WETLAND FRESH WATER TREATMENT SALT WATER WELL WF^V^p ai TREATMENT. SAL^ BLACKWATER FROM STUDENT BATHHOUSE .AND AC BATHROOMS FOCTUREG -O TOILETS SEPTIC TANK LOCO GAL FIXTURES 1 SINK 4 LAVS. AND 2 WASHNG MACHNES TREATMENT TANK AREA 300 SF (270 SM) INSOE WITH I FT. WIDE RETAINING WALLS 00 LF (30 M) X 2FT wnH PERFORATED PIPE AT CENTRAL FRESHWATER GARDEN AND COURTYARD PERMETER LANDSCAPING

Page 216

CMPBS was initially hired in 1998 by UT Houston Health Science Center to join an integrative design envisioning charrette for what would be the campus’ first free-standing building in its 32-year history and, notably, its first green building. CMPBS provided strategic consulting on materials selection, integrative energy, water and waste systems, and implementation of Carbon Dioxide Intensity Ratio and BaselineGreen” tools to reveal environmental and economic impacts associated with materials selection, collaborating with the BNIM-LakelFlato architectural team along with a host of other consultants and UT Houston Health Science Center architect and facility management staff. 1998 LOCATION: University of Texas, Houston, Texas CLIENT: University of Texas Houston Health Science Center FUNDING: University of Texas Houston Health Science Center PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Jessica Kleiss; Rich MacMath; Greg Norris; Sally Struble; Gail Vittori; BNIM Architects, Lake I Flato (architects); Life Cycle Balancing: Introducing Carbon Dioxide Balancing Within Materials (1999) One goal of the UT Houston Health Science Center project was to respond at a local scale to the Kyoto Protocol by utilizing renewable materials that are potentially net sinks of carbon. Namely, if the carbon from CO2 “stored” in some building materials is equal to or greater than the total carbon released as CO2 during the upstream life cycle stages of other materials. When this is accomplished, assuming a certain longevity for the material, then the materials (ideally) may have “zero impact” on global carbon dioxide warming during their useful life. To ensure success in carrying out carbon dioxide balance within material specification, certain protocols need to be followed that enable this procedure to be carried out successfully. These protocols are the following: a) develop a baseline condition using national and regional data that describes the hierarchy of impact in CSI or Uniformat terms so that work is directed where the most imbalance presently exists; b) use a building design approach at whatever scale that fits into the CIB International Protocol on Open Building Systems so that there is a clear differentiation between infill and structure; c) each system becomes reusable through easily accomplished disassembly and reassembly procedures, otherwise the carbon balancing might be a false premise over time; d) the building is divided into identifiable scalar entities which could potentially be clearly balanced within themselves; e) module sizes of components be determined to coordinate to other parts of other subsystems (e.g. wall to floor to ceiling to furniture); f) sizes and weights of components be designed for the potential of human interaction and alteration which influences how many supports are required; g) that there is a high degree of recycled and locally sourced components, thus reducing the amount of carbon dioxide impact to be balanced from the start; and h) materials that are termed natural are not necessarily higher in carbon dioxide sequestering due to their actual upstream impacts. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON SCHOOL OF NURSING

Page 218

srrE PLAN 1000 PERSONS FOOTPRINT = 120,000 SF DID ^OFFICE / CLASSROOM ^CLUSTER 90 PERSONS FOOTPRINT = 240 SF Ainni-nninniCT-rfn^^ MQ^£B&nBB^m> OFFICE PLAN FURNISHINGS INTERIOR SYSTEMS FLOOR FINISHES 100 PERSONS FOOTPRINT = 12,000 SF 20 PERSONS FOOTPRINT = 240 SF MOVABLE INTERIOR PARTrnONS MOVABLE FURNISHINGS CABINET UNITS DESK UNITS SHELF UNFTS PARTITIONS FRAME FINISHED FLOOR Olb C02 Olb 002 -1,250 lb 002

• 850 lb C02 -1,800 lb 002 O lb C02 FLY ASH CEMENT RECYCLED CONTENT STEEL PIUNGS As in most industrialized countries, the most significant greenhouse gas (by volume) emitted in the U.S. is carbon dioxide, accounting for 82-84% of the total global warming potential of all U. S. greenhouse gas emissions. Greater than 98% of all U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide originate from the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas. Fossil fuel combustion emissions are determined by three factors: a) energy-consuming processes and services, b) their energy intensity (ie., the amount of energy used for each process or service), and c) the carbon intensity of the fossil fuel energy source (i.e., the amount of carbon dioxide released per unit of fuel used). Less than 2% of U.S. carbon emissions are caused by non-combustion industrial processes such as chemical reactions occurring during cement manufacture, soda ash manufacture and consumption, and aluminum production. Fossil fuel combustion sources can be divided into four energy end- use sectors: transportation, industrial, residential, and commercial. For all the sectors except transportation, a substantial portion of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions result from the consumption of electricity (including losses). To date, most efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions during a buildings useful life are focused on the energy consumption required to operate and maintain a building. Numerous energy efficiency measures that significantly reduce energy consumption during a building’s use, operation, and maintenance (e.g., energy-efficient lighting) have been accepted and implemented by design professionals and the building industry. However, the use phase represents only one chapter in the building life cycle story. The upstream phase of processing and manufacturing building materials and products causes enormous off-site impacts prior to the building’s use. It is evident that the practices of building design and the construction industry play a significant role in releasing greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide emissions. With a potential crisis fast approaching and the likelihood of environmental impact methods being imposed through legislation and regulation, now is the time for building industry professionals to become leaders rather than followers in developing new approaches to designing the built environment.

Page 219

OUTPUTS (measured in pounds): Initial o2 in bldg 4,485.6 Oxygen in building 4,323.9 Initial co2 in bldg 974.2 co2 in building 1,125.8 Initial ratio 4.5 Ratio o2 to co2 0.834090 INPUTS: SOURCE: Number of People: 10pm to 8am20 Bam to 5pm 5pm to 10pm Human co2 needed PROCESSING: Light Intensity: 5am to Bam Bam to 4pm 4pm to 9pm 9pm to Bam sq ft of plants o2 produced/plant co2 conserved/plant 0.3 0.75 0.4 0.1 6,000 0.002917 0.004167 400 100 0.91667 18.0012.00 Hours 3%:^ 1250.00- 4350.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 _900.00 4150.00 .]. 0.00 6.00 Graph 1 (Untitled) CONOrriONED SPACE OPERABLE WINDOWS* MATERIAL OUTGASING PHOTOCATALYTC OXIDATION (PCO) UNIT IN RETURN AIR FLOW SOIL, POROUS ROCK, AND H20 FOR BIOFILTRATION PLANTS FOR O2/CO2 BALANCE 0.077083 RE-SOURCE: human o2 needed PROCESSING RE-SOURCEDISTRIBUTION Oxygen In building 02 prod per plant 02 human 02 needed 02 Inhaledroduced by plants Initial ratio SOURCE Water availability ©4C02 cons per plant COZ InCOZ out raeqple this hour human COZ needed TRANSPORT C02 l|building SOIL. POROUS PHOTOCATALYTIC OXIDATION (PCO) UNTT IN RETURN AIR FLOW OPERABLE WINDOWS MATERIAL OUTGASING The industrial sector of the U.S. economy accounts for about one-third of national end-use carbon dioxide emissions with manufacturing activities accounting for the largest share of the sector. Aside from electric utilities, whose purpose it is to produce electric power for the rest of the economy, the top-ranked manufacturing industry of the industrial sector in terms of the total impact of carbon emissions is the building industry (including new, maintenance, repair, and remodeling construction). Consider the building industry’s share of total carbon dioxide emissions for all sectors of the U.S. economy: • It’s the largest sector accounting for roughly twenty percent of total annual industrial emissions and seven percent of the U.S. annual total. • Upstream carbon emissions are roughly five times greater than direct emissions (for construction of the building) and ten to twenty times greater than the annual operation (use) of the building. • Within the building industry, the largest single material or product contributing to carbon emissions is portland cement-based ready-mix concrete (9%). For an office/academic type building similar in size and use to the this project, upstream carbon emissions are associated with the various Uniformat Level 1 major building groups or sub-systems as follows: Shell (Superstructure, Exterior Closure, Roofing) 24%; Service Systems (Electrical, HVAC, Plumbing, Conveying) 22%; Interiors (Interior Construction and Finishes) 15%; Service Sector 14%; Substructure (Foundations) 5%; Equipment and Furnishings 3%; Other/Miscellaneous 17%.

Page 220

+6 C Q O O O O W LU co UI O Ul O C UJ ^ D CO t co co 5 O CC Q O i co M a:^ O--------^ △_ in i8^o 111 O O O U lt- 0)to co o co (T 9 O O-------------- co LU--------^ CL _____ CARBON DIOXIDE INTENSITY RATIO (CDIR) OF LONG-LASTING BUILDING MATERIALS CDIR = (CO2e - C02s) / weight of material C02e = weight of upstream C02 emissions CO2s = equivalent weight of C02 stored as carbon in the material Positive ratios indicate net carbon dioxide sources Negative ratios Indicate net carbon dioxide sinks The carbon dioxide intensity factor (CDIF) is defined here as the ratio between the net upstream carbon dioxide impact (emissions minus storage) of a material and the weight of the material. It can be described by the following equation: CDIF = (CO2e — CO2s)/material end use weight (CO2e = the weight of upstream CO2 emissions and CO2s = the equivalent weight of CO2 stored as carbon in the mass of the material) A material with a positive CDIF is a net carbon dioxide source and one with a negative CDIF is a net carbon sink Cement is selected as an example of a carbon dioxide source material. It’s production releases carbon from both fossil fuel combustion and chemical processes. Particleboard is included as an example of a carbon dioxide sink material. Metals are net sources of carbon dioxide. In the case of iron and steel, for every pound used in buildings, roughly two pounds of carbon dioxide are emitted upstream. Therefore, carbon dioxide emissions are two times greater than the end use weight of steel in buildings and the CDIF is 2. By weight, synthetic organic materials such as polystyrene have a similar impact. Ceramic materials, on the other hand, emit much less carbon dioxide. For every pound of concrete used in buildings, for example, slightly less than 1/50 (0.02) pounds of carbon dioxide are emitted upstream. Therefore, carbon dioxide emissions are 1/50 the end use weight of concrete in building and the CDIF is 0.2 By weight, the upstream impact of portland cement is much greater, having a 1.2 CDIF. Most natural organic building materials and products, such as sawn timber and plywood, are net sinks of carbon dioxide. For example, for every pound of sawn timber, lumber, plywood, or particle board used in a building, the net storage of carbon dioxide is one quarter to one half pound for the life of the building or product. Therefore, these materials have a CDIF of -0.25 to -0.5. This is a very rough approximation, for the actual carbon dioxide emissions that can be allocated to timber and fiber production vary greatly from region to region and depend on the source (e.g., tropical), management practices, and type of wood (e.g., softwood or hardwood). TNs data indicates that metal, synthetic organic, and ceramic building materials are net sources of carbon dioxide emissions and that some natural, organic, or biomass materials are net carbon sinks. This is due to the capacity of biomass materials to absorb carbon dioxide and transform it to carbon in the mass of the material. The relative impacts of one material compared with another in terms of carbon dioxide released or absorbed is information that is relevant to addressing the Kyoto Protocol agreement. Consider, for example, the design goal of a carbon dioxide emission “low-impact” building. The design process would include an analysis of the overall balance between carbon dioxide source and carbon dioxide sink materials. Specifications could state carbon dioxide balancing as a performance criteria for individual products or groups of products and building systems such as exterior closure or structural frame. For example, a reinforced concrete structure may be chosen over an all-steel structure because it achieves a better carbon dioxide balance, assuming that the volume of steel in the former is much less than in the latter.

Page 221

(O- Zb 4^ Many factors influence the level of carbon dioxide in the indoor environment including the number of people, their size, the physiological level of activity, the performance of the HVAC system, the presence of plants, the season of the year, and the time of day. The maximum concentration for and eight hour period established by OSHA and other federal agencies is 5,000 part per million. There have been cases documented where levels below 5,000 ppm have caused discomfort and headaches. Levels of 3,000 ppm have been measured in houses, schools, and offices. Under typical conditions with outside air ventilation, indoor carbon dioxide levels are not physiologically important. However, if outside air intake rates are significantly lowered in energy-efficient buildings, then carbon dioxide accumulation may become a health concern for building users. A system that can remove airborne pollutants, VOCs, and carbon dioxide solves this problem. Plants are therefore included in the micro-ecosystem component to remove indoor carbon dioxide and produce dioxide. One design objective is to make the plant micro-ecosystem component self-sustaining at the scale of the workstation, workstation/classroom cluster, or building floor by supplying all necessary soil nutrients and water from sources generated within these building scales. The planting bed soil can be periodically enriched by compost produced from organic waste recycling in vermiculture bins located at each workstation and workstation/classroom cluster. Water can be supplied at each building floor from the dehumidification condensate from the HVAC system. A per person footprint for the plant micro-ecosystem component was established using NASA experimental data. The total plant stand area for 02 production and CO2 removal balance was demonstrated to be 120 square feet per person. This benchmark was established under controlled laboratory conditions and should therefore be regarded as a minimum.

Page 222

2000 LOCATION: East Texas CLIENT: Anonymous FUNDING: Anonymous PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Richard MacMath; Fabien Prouvost; Pablo Serna EcoBalance: A Sustainable Land Use and Planning Methodology (2009) At this project in east Texas, it was evident that the property’s lush, plant - oriented characteristics needed to be emphasized and made into a special and permanent attribute as far into the future as possible. Overlay maps of all composites were created so that we could look at what the land was telling us. Patterns were found within the overlay map information, and were tested according to the original program goals. Out of this re-synthesis we found that certain attributes of soil, vegetation, microclimate, and the relationship to natural and agricultural areas indicated different solutions from different land areas. Agriculture in one area, for example, was prairie-oriented while in another the hydrology and soils showed a wetter environment. Woodlands dominated some areas of the site, while other areas contained extensively refurbished soils. The special qualities differentiating these areas led to natural delineation of settlements that could cooperatively share their products and resources amongst themselves. As these settlements together increased productivity, they could then also afford to supply others outside of the area. EAST TEXAS PROJECT

Page 223

irrigation o’ aeration of vratir iOUPOS^ STORAGE WEAVING REEDSPROCESS |bamboo} BAMBOO PROCESS POND SUGAR CANE PROCESS TREES FOR FISH FOOD CHICKEN TRACTORS, FRENCH INTENSIVE RAISED BEDS processed weaving reeds weaving reeds -Rucks Esh crayfish beans and grapes production in trellis FISH / CRAYFISH POND sugar base epoxy

Page 224

BASE/ INVENTORY MAPS NATURE

• Species Survey
• Habitat Survey PHYSIOGRAPHIC
• Contours
• Hydrology -Geology -Climate Data HUMAN
• Human Needs Data
• Special Features
• Site improvements LEGAL
• Legal Conflicts
• Spatial & Metabolic legalities VEGETATIVE -Vegetation Density -Vegetation Type
• Aerial Infrared photo SUITABILITY MAPS ECOBALANCE
• Preserved Nature AIR 7 r WATER —Il -FOOD! -02 bWater Harvesting’ I-Croplandi -C02 |-Waste Water I I -Composting |Treatment| ENERGY Building Capture/ Retention -Infrastructure Utility Use space MATERIAL
• Material Soure -Material Use (Buildings, roads etc.) HAZARDS -Wildfire -Flood -Tornado -Contamination AIR WATER ^4’ COMPOSITE MAPS NAUTURAL LAND
• Land used to preserve, protect and regenerate Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystems PRODUCTIVE LAND
• Land used for sourcing human needs such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries BUILT LAND
• Land development footprint for buildings and facilities like playfields. INFRASTRUCTURE LAND
• Footprint of all human infrastruc- tiural activities like transportation water, sewage and power. FOOD PRiORrnES SYNTHESIS MAPS PATTERNS PRINCIPLES PROGRAM ECOBALANCED MASTERPLAN ENERGY MATERIAL In various combinations, the many.Base/lnventory Maps form “Suitability Maps” illustrating five human life support themes — Air, Water, Food, Energy, and Materials — as well as the site conditions defined by Ecosystems and Hazards. For each life support theme, the amount of land available to fulfill both sourcing and re-sourcing is determined. Then, using figures for the minimum amount of land required to support one person (a per capita life cycle footprint), the carrying capacity of the site is determined for each of the five life support themes. The amount of land within the site boundaries that is suitable for each life support need is divided by the per capita ecological footprint for that need, resulting in a site population total representing the carrying capacity of the site for each life support need. Each of the five life support needs result in different site population capacities. The next step in preparing the master plan was to create four “Composite Maps.” These are composites of the five life support theme maps plus the Ecosystem and Hazards maps. The planning process works on the premise that all land types can be divided into four basic types: natural, productive, built (or developed land) and infrastructure. Natural land includes those uses that preserve, protect, and regenerate ecosystems. Productive land includes all uses appropriated for human needs such as agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. Built land includes the actual footprint of land development including buildings and facilities (e.g., athletic fields). Infrastructure land is the footprint of all human infrastructure activities: water, waste-water, transportation, power, etc. Each Composite Map is a separate document that can be overlaid on the site and on other Composite Maps. These Maps comprise the basis for decision making in the ecoBalance planning process. In short, the composite map is a graphic summary of all the previous maps — the Base/lnventory Maps and the Suitability Maps — organized according to the three main land use topics.

Page 225

Nortl West ’. Ea$t?» SUITABILITY MAPS \ AIR WATER FOOD ENERGY MATERIAL COMPOSITE MAPS BUILT LAND NAUTURAL LAND PRODUCTIVE LAND INFRASTRUCTURE LAND SYNTHESIS MAPS SOUTH SETTLEMENT SETTLEMENT NORTH SEnLEMENT WEST SEnLEMENT To describe the settlements more specifically, the West Settlement is larger in terms of contiguous area for human habitation and is dominated by a restored prairie site. The area known as the South Settlement is cloistered with a large woodland that leaves it visually and spatially separated from the others and with a high potential for forest-based habitation. To the East we find a large contiguous area of habitable land surrounding a pond. This is the lowest area of the site and has natural conditions for high soil moisture crops. Reeds of a wide variety of types, including sugar cane, lead to development of a concept for a reed based micro economy. To the north, which is known as the North Settlement, there has already been established a very productive intensive gardening operation with emphasis on flowering plants. The pattern of habitation determined for this area is quite different from the others due to the land features in that area indicating suitability for small, separated plots of land with separate building structures. Coincidentally, this is the development pattern of buildings already established in this area. The master plan is the final reflection of how the Settlements work together. A transportation system defines each Settlement and connects each to the others within the community as a whole. A community entrance separates the public from the private and two commercial export areas connect the site to transport routes to the east and west. Higher canopy vegetation is planted at the breaks between land use types. This is done to establish spatial definition and define the territory for each settlement. All transport routes are coordinated to be along as many of these vegetative edges as possible. The approach of the master plan is to offer incentive and guidelines for future land use development.

Page 226

EAST SETTLEMENT 3 5 SOUTH SETTLEMENT 3 ‘SUGARCANE 2RSH&0UCX/ J COMPOSTING <INTTN5TVE SMATETOM 6HAnrTABt£ FIUD OXmATlON ROUTT RAISED HID/ PROCESSING SPACE POND CHICKEN TIUCTOR rACIUTY 2 CHESTNUT PLANTATION S MATEAIAL PROCESSING rAOUTY 4 MUSHROOM FARM 3OAK PLANTATION WEST SETTLEMENT J NORTH SETTLEMENT 4FOOD PROCESSING FAOurr J BIOFUEL PROCESSPiG ROUTT POND CHICKEN TRACTOR GREENHOUSE SVEGETADLE,.INTENSIVE Each settlement possesses very different relationships to the infrastructure zone of land that winds its way throughout the community. Various technology/land scenarios develop, leading us to establish flow diagrams of how the infrastructure zone serves each settlement. The infrastructure becomes a resource flow integrator between land use types and, in doing so, is a mark of resource management that maximized the use of resources in each settlement when combined with the solar constant. Settlements are working entities functioning together in resource terms within a single community, each one serving the others to some degree by representing unique resource integrations. For example, the cane-based East Settlement could export epoxy glue derived from the sugar cane crops grown in the wet zone. The forested South Settlement could supply Chestnut wood, the material of choice for the post and beam building system planned for the site. In this case, since Chestnut trees have been long vacant from Texas forests, hybrid species of American and Chinese chestnut would be re-introduced. The pegs for putting the post and beam system together would be sourced from either an oak wood plantation area that also acts as a mushroom farm or from the existing productive zone forest. The chip wood panels would be derived from a planted Southern Yellow Pine bound together with the sugar-based glue from the Southern Settlement. When exports from between Settlements exceed the needs of the community, they could be sold. Many of these goods would be value-added products in that they combine multiple resources to form a unique product type. For example, selling bread made from amaranth grown on-site or sugar-based epoxy instead of the sugar. Other resources produced within the Settlements are special enough that they could be sold with little extra work, such as flowers grown in the North Settlement.

Page 227

T; ELECTRICITY: USE/ CONSERVATION CONVERTOF SOLAR PVn KETCHEN CISTERNS WETLANDS EAT1N( VEGETABLE GARDEN CpMP0^NG| The ecoBalonce methodology can be applied using the building itself as the boundary In order to keep this explanation relatively simple, only.key life support topics related to building level (Le energy, water and food) are considered. The figure above illustrates each part of a life cycle process in the building plan of a dwelling unit in this project. Energy is sourced from solar PV’s, processed using an AC/DC converter, and used (as well as conserved) within the building envelope Water is sourced from rooftop rainwater harvesting, stored in cisterns, used for toilet, kitchen, and other standard domestic uses, and re-sourced using on-site wetlands. Food is sourced from an on-site vegetable garden, processed in the kitchen area, eaten in the dining area, and re-sourced as compost either in a composting toilet or a composting pile. These building metabolics are further elaborated in a representative building section (seen on the following page) where each life support topic is converted into flows. Using this technique, specific building components can be identified and more complex life cycle processes and integrations are showcased. For example, energy can be divided into four flows: electricity (from renewable sources like sun and wind), thermal energy in form of hot water, waste heat from appliances (which can be captured and re-circulated), and Biomass energy from on-site vegetation (which can be used in a flex fuel stove for cooking to produce ‘biochar as a re-source which, when added to soil, increases its fertility and carbon sequestering capability). In addition to flows, it is also possible to include other aspects of energy such as solar passive heating/cooling techniques, high thermal mass walls, shade, natural lighting and ventilation, heat gain from electric appliances, and energy conserved by LED lights, ceiling fans and ice battery dehumidifier. These system diagrams can be used to calculate the actual energy/water needed to sustain one person or one house-hold, the roof area needed for PV’s or rainwater harvesting, determine the amount of waste heat output, and the size of cisterns and wetlands. The integrated system design approach is needed for maximizing the potential of the building to balance as many life support needs as possible witbn its boundary. It also helps to identify multiple uses of various components. A fruit tree, for example, represents all three life support topics. It is a source of biomass and shade, it can be irrigated by wastewater, nurtured by compost, and provides fruit. For simplicity’s sake, the building components, which represent more than one life support topic, have been colored according to the major topic. The integrated system design approach demonstrates the synergy between the natural and built environment and how both are required to complete all the four life cycle processes.

Page 228

Wind Energy ^vstero 9nnn kwh suntrost Ketngerntnr 370 kWh I260 Ibs.l 0.63 lonLI 7^4 7.49.mliip.Q.^… 1.2 Tons Biochar .. __ 94QlbsJ 0.45ions! Epgd_Wqs|e Qe^LeOL salt water Natural Swimming Pool go’s constructed wetionc 75 sft (max 2’ depth) Solar PV System 5000 kWh ?oof area 2360 sail WIND ENERGY SOLAR PV SOLAR WATER TREE-SHADE/ SYSTEM SYSTEM HEATER BIOMASS PASIVE SOLAR SYSTEMS ^Eb Lights 330 kWh | len 5p Water Heqt€ 100 kWh Microwaye Oyen 107 kWh^, DC/AC CONVERTOR ENERGY STAR DISHWASHER DISHWASHER LAUNDRYFLEX-FUEL STOVE SUN FROST REFRIGERATOR INST WATER MICROWAVE OVEN INSTANLEAF SEPERATOR TREATMENT CISTERN RO/ UV WATER ENERGY STAR LAUNDRY DISHWASHER DISHWASHER WATER HE UVING POOL ROOF RAINWATER COLLECTION ICE BATTERY WATER CONDENSATE SOLAR DISTILLATION SAUNE/ BRACKISH WATER FRUIT TREE FOOD GARDEN AQUA- ‘PONICS UVING POOL WETLANDS SUN FROST REFRIGERATOR FLEX-FUEL STOVE MICROWAVE OVEN

Page 229

qqetables for 6 people Greywater V, 123 sft (max: 900 sft Aquaculture pond etland ‘depihl Ceiling Fans 3600 kWh .Shower 52.5 aa Waler Closet75umniiiion biu recaptured hdaty 3 cubic yard (81 cu it) Composting Facility 40 million BTU Thermal energy (Solar + Instant Water Heater, Laundry washer 66.6 gal/day 270 kWh^-.. Y Water Heatei lOO kWhlq Bathroom Sink 3.75 qal/dav dot Water storage tank- 60 gallon capacilv vegetable Garden 2400 sft 123 gal/day ^.To05.M.e^qfJ.o.rg. biomass ”•“Gie^waJei 123 Qay@iy I ton yard waste ----------------------------ELECTRICmt — — — —THERMAL ENERGY ----------------------------WASTE HEAT …BIOMASS -TTT DE-HUMIDIFIER ZA-JER ICE BATTERY LED LIGHTS CELINING WATER FAN PUMPS HEAT BIO- EXCHANGER CHAR NATURAL LIVING POOL PASIVE SOLAR ICE BATTERY WATER LIGHT SWIMMING SYSTEMS CONDENSATE ------------------------------FRESHWATER — — — — —SAUNE WATER ------------------------------GREYWATER …BLACKWATER KITCHEN =R I SINK BATHROOM WATER SHOWER/ FOOD SOLAR WATER SINK CLOSET BATHTUB GARDEN HEATER GREWYATER CONSTRUCTED BLACKWATER WETLAND WETLAND TREATMENT SYSTEM — FOOD FLOW COMPOST FLOW DINING TABLE/ EATING COMPOSTING COMPOSTING TOILET PILE

Page 230

As a member of the Hickory Consortium, one of the US Department of Energy’s Building America-funded teams in the early 2000s, CMPBS provided life cycle design materials assessment as part of a collaborative effort to create affordable, energy efficient industrialized building systems. As a prototype, the GreenForms building demonstrates opportunities to maximize flexible space planning and carbon balanced materials within a small footprint, with a staircase that becomes a table, and ceiling integrated storage systems. GreenForms was an early example of pin-based foundation systems used for buildings, thereby minimizing site disturbance. The practice has been adopted by architectural firms as integral to low-impact construction. 2001 LOCATION: Austin, Texas CLIENT: The Hickory Consortium; Mark Kelley, P. E. FUNDING: The Educational Foundation of America; U.S. Department of Energy Building America Program PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Richard Baker; Laura Boutelle; Down Danby; Jeff Hunt; Mark Kelley; Rich MacMath; Alison McMillin; Randall Notgrass; Geoffrey Peek; Dirk Raffegerst; Joachim Serazio; Karl Schwingel; Melanie Schopper; Erick Tveite; Ron Wilcox GreenForms: An Open Building Approach to Affordable / Sustainable Housing (2002) GreenForms develops the potential of open-building at the object, systems, and metasystems levels. It embraces local materials and labor, converts waste to construction resources, integrates green technologies into local home building industries, and develops new production chains (by-products become resources) to enhance productivity and quality of life. It promotes ecological responsibility, economic viability, and resident empowerment by accommodating diverse local materials (earth, fiber, and waste based) as construction resources, translating consumptive (wood, energy, water), cement-based technologies, and allowing construction to occur incrementally by residents. This project address resourcerflows in the hierarchical leyels in which it operates: global, biome, community, home, site, and assembly. It optimizes flexibility at environmental levels. Housing and community design use greenForms structural systems in conjunction with pro-manufactured wall, floor, and roof components or os structural systems that receive locally produced, non-structural earth, fiber or industrial by-product based materials. GreenForms integrates the flexibility of open-building environmental levels with the incremental development necessary in progressive communities to enhance local housing, labor, and industry bases. It begins as labor-intensive, low-tech, low-cost technologies, and “grows” through phases of increasing space, sophistication, complexity, and efficiency. GreenForms facilitates growth from modest beginnings (8’ x 8’ informal business with open-air sleeping grows into a multi-story home). Residents progressively build complexity and amenities into their homes. As the individual unit changes, non-structural in-fill walls and module sizes (8’ x 8’, 8’ x 13-4”, and 13-4” x 13-4”) provide opportunity for diversity in size and layout. GREENFORMS™

Page 232

GreenForms integrates ecological, economic, and technological systems to increase productivity (with minimal embodied capital and energy) of natural, human, and industrial systems, improves quality of life, and promotes resource-balance. It achieves these by accommodating diverse potential materials and technologies and harvesting, managing, and regenerating resources. Pleasing at all incremental construction phases, the greenForms aesthetic expresses the unfinished nature of progressive communities. It provides visual continuity through the consistency of base-building components (framing materials, structural modules, exoskeletal veil) while accommodating change and individual expression via fit-out (infill) components. In initial phases (with the need for maximum area and minimum costs), exoskeletal shading provides a positive utilitarian aesthetic and thermal comfort. In later stages, GreenForms continues to accommodate individual expression as the community aesthetic completes itself.

Page 233

11, . Hi GreenForms technologies include green architecture, integrative support systems, and base-building structures that accommodate diverse earth, fiber, and waste based local and regional materials. The building harvests water, energy, and light, converts solid and liquid wastes to resources, and integrates building and plants to optimize natures ability to produce foodstuffs, enhance building and site microclimates, increase comfort, and reduce costs. These highly-integrated systems can evolve through phases of increasing sophistication, complexity, efficiency, and comfort. The Water / Wastewater / Landscape / Energy System (integrated heating, cooling, water, wastewater and landscape subsystems) harvests water and wastewater to sustain living fences, fruit trees, trellises (food production and shading of building and site use areas), and raised planters (herb, vegetable, cut-flower production). Plant evapotranspiration and saturated soil thermal mass enhance energy efficiency. The exoskeleton system is a flexible wire grid on rebar frame which supports vines that process nutrients from building-generated human waste into leaves that shade walls, roofs, and use areas to improve microclimates. The structural frame system serves various roles in the life cycle of the integrated water/wastewater/landscape/energy/structural system. GreenForms combines nature’s ecological dynamics (the nature of nature is change) with the physical dynamics of progressive communities (informal and incremental). The building embraces, participates in, and celebrates change as the natural and human order of things. The emergent, open, and evolutionary communities are always in a state of becoming something else and celebrating an aesthetic of the unfinished — or the aesthetic of becoming.

Page 234

CYPRESS BIG WINDOW C02 BALANCING WINDOW FRAMES MATERIALS: ____
GALVANIZED STEEL CYPRESS UWT3 OF CTPIG3 REQUIRED TOR BALANCE ^UNTTS CORNCTS:CiHcS3 HONTOXTAL DECORATION 1 CYPRESS HORaOMTAL FRAME: OALVAIAZED STEEL 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 -2000 -3000 LONG LEAF PINE BIG WINDOW -t UNIT TWCK SWOTS THICK lUNnSTHCK CORNERS: CORNERS VEimCAL OECCRATTON: VERTICAL DECORATTONa HORIZONTAL DECORATION: LONG LEAF FINE VERTICAL DECORATION: LONG LEAF PINE VEHTTCAL FRAMEi GALVANIZED STEEL HORXZDNT AL FRAME: GALVANIZED STEEL GREENFORMS C02 balancing! WINDOW FRAMES UNnS OF LONG LTAF RHE REQUIRED FOR BALANCE: 37 UNITS MATERIALS: GALVANIZED STE LONG LEAF PINE GREENFORMS NET C02 RELEASE -2104.68 TOTAL SKIN MESQUITE BIG WINDOW VERTTCAL DECORATION: MESourrE HORIZONTAL DECORATIONt iiesourre CULVA>UZED STEEL hUNTTS TKCK UrOT THKX auxrrsTKcx 0. CORNERS: VERTICAL DECORATION 1 UESQurn: VErmCAL DECORATIONi MESQUITE VERTICAL FRAME: GALVANIZED STEEL TOTAL SKIN TOTAL STRUCTURE END NET CO2 RELEASE CORNERS tMESCUITE I4ATEFI1AL5 : I WOTS OF UESQUTTE GALVANIZED STEEL | REQUIRED FOR BALANCE: PAESQUrFE | 32 UNITS GREENFORMS -2104.68# 3363.2 # 1258.52# 3363.2 TOTAL STRUCTURE END NET CO2 RELEASE (lbs.)

Page 236

Longju Sustainable Village: Designing & Planning A Culturally & Technically Flexible Village Environment (2002) The mayor of Longju, located in the Sichuan Province of China, asked the U.S. Department of Energy for help in the planning, engineering and design of a model sustainable village for farmers. The purpose was to entice farmers to stay on the land with the eventual building of approximately seven thousand villages. The struggle for food is now two-fold in China, not only can the country barely feed itself but, due to open trade policy with the rest of the world, the incentive for a farmer to remain on the small plot of land allocated to each family is not in their economic interest. 2001 LOCATION: Longju, China CLIENT: Sichuan Province, Longju Village, Guanghan, China FUNDING: U.S. Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Lab PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III with representatives from BNIM Architects, Civil Engineering Research Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Institute, Cascade Earth Services, Jack Jenkins and Larry Hill, U.S. Department of Energy The Sichuan province, located in central China, is considered the nations breadbasket. The region’s geography shows a large, round valley with the proposed site for Longju Village on the north side of this region. In evaluating regional resources, we discovered that in addition to being a major food producing region, it also contains some of the country’s major gas and coal deposits. China presently is home to twenty-one percent of the world’s population and represents eleven and a half percent of global energy demand, with approximately sixty- two percent of its current energy production derived from coal. If one were to balance the 3.3 x 10(9) amount of carbon dioxide with forests alone, the country would be 56 fold in imbalance (only 21.6% of China’s original forests still exist). LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE

Page 238

The project objectives were driven by a desire to enhance the well-being of the area s farmers. The U.S. and Chinese participants decided on a series of objectives and incentives to ensure that a proper understanding and transition take place due to the somewhat unusual needs of living sustainably. These included: • Farmer Skills; Support methods that incorporate the farmers’ inventiveness and ingenuity by promoting diversified uses of agricultural products and practices (e.g., plants for wastewater treatment, plant systems for erosion stabilization) in place of imported large scale wastewater plants or concrete embankments. • Farm Products: Offer farmers comparable range of farm- based opportunities as an urban person has in the city by supplying multiple outlets for plant based products (e.g. plant fibers for lightweight insulating panels in building, plant-based road stabilizing fluids) in place of energy intensive, petroleum- based insulation or concrete road surfaces. • Farmer Efficiency; Improve farmers’ efficiency in time and resources by using solar dryers to accelerate drying time while protecting crops from frequent rains, in place of government-subsidized fossil fuel-based drying. • Farmer Health: Improve farmers’ health through improved drinking water using solar distillation for all potable uses, instead of chemically treating water. • Farmers Freedom to’Adapt; Develop flexible architecture to adapt to various farmer needs (e.g. microindustry - micro-commerce - home expansion). • Farm’s ability to convert non-renewable coal resources for soil mineralization; Research the potential for the use of coal as a trace element and mineral supply to regenerate the soils of China. The group acknowledged that incentives must be integrated into the village’s financial and general operations for the proposed objectives to be adopted by the local villagers. These incentives were developed as a transitional means for evolving an economic structure that enables sustainable technologies to compete fairly with conventional technologies.

1. to parallel the present governmental financial support of centralized infrastructure that use a) non-sustainable methods such as fossil fuel energy by also partially supporting decentralized renewable methods and some of the labor costs for construction b) non-sustainable water and wastewater technologies by also financially supporting water and wastewater technologies based on decentralized plant based methods c) portland cement by balancing of this high green house gas producing material with both coal based fly ash cement and high biomass based CO2 sequestering materials as in fill within the building system 2 to initiate through everyday trade within a sustainable village environment a system where true (unsubsidized) values of products is advocated by a) supporting the informal farming economy of trading the real farmer work value of one product directly for the value of another b) deepening economic stability by bridging topics within sustainability through equivalent values (e.g. organic food produce for trip miles on sustainable forms of transport, or the recycling of organic waste into the land in trade for a solar dryer for better production)
2. to replace the government support of large scale infrastructure by a decentralized physical support system that functions as a simultaneous armature for sustainable technologies and as a building structure to support in fill walls
3. to trade off space allocation along a commercially based promenade from conventional sales of non-sustainable products to one of a) solar products b) added value farm products or c) organic food restaurants and eateries and to receive tax incentives for doing so.

Page 239

SITE LOCATION KirrariirHii •/TCH temno TRACE ELEMENTS IN GOAL (‘/TOK RANGE 1<,/tan> ALUMINIUM Ton (160.290) ARSENIC 0572 (2.6) BARIUM 2006 (2-2) BORON 14 BORON OSS (NA) CALCIUM NA CADMIUM <roi (NA) CHROMIUM ora (NA) COBALT NA (02-IB) IRON NA COPPER 037 (ns.4) LEAD (24-54) MAGNESIUM 1 UTHUM 054 (NA) MANGANESE OA MANGANESE ; OS (NA) MOLYBDENUM OWE (NA) NICKEL 0338 (06-4) PHOSPHOROUS OIPHOSPHOROUS PENTAOXIDE 7£ (NA) POTASSIUM- NA SELENIUM 0022 (01-06) SILVER ora (NA) STRONTIUM ’ NA . (4-52) SULPHUR NA TITANIUM 17 (NA) ZINC 02 ’ ZINC ofirn (.4-2) A OIL DRILLING [] NATURAL GAS @ COAL RESERVE TO POPULATION The issue of whether to burn cool or to pulverize it and use its mineral content as a partial soil amendment seems to be without precedent. We know the immense dire consequences associated with burning China s vast coal reserves but seldom suggest an alternative for its use that could help a country go through the necessary transition to sustainability. The problems arising from using coal as a fertilizer amenity are also considerable due to the quantity of toxic substances that may occur such as cadmium, mercury, arsenic, to name a few. The proposal is to look at the feasibility of bio-remediating these substances before the finely pulverized coal is mixed in a high rate composting system to produce an organic fertilizer. Some plant species, such as the ubiquitous reed phragmites have been proven to accomplish this bio-remediation task. Due to the extreme loss of productive soils throughout China along with a high degree of demineralization, the dire consequences of burning coal, and the nations need for food, this option is worthy of investigation. The chart above compares some of the positive ingredients of coal relative to a high mineralization soil additive called green sand.

Page 240

EXPERIMENTAL AGRICULTURE GRAIN AGRICULTURE MIXED INTENSIVE VEGETABLE ANIMAL MICRO-INTESIVE AQUACULTURE SOL4R GREEN HOUSE PRODUCTION MICRO-INTENSIVE VERMICULTURE INSECTUARY FOR CROP PESTS AGRO-FORESTRY MIXED DUCK/FISH TEA HOUSE ENTRANCE PAGODA WATER GARDEN MIXED HOUSING & MICRO AG-INDUSTRY MIXED HOUSING & SOLAR-INDUSTRY PROMENADE EATERIES COMMUNITY CENTER COMMUNICATION ANAEROBIC GAS TREATMENT

Page 241

MIXED USE BUILDING ON PROMENADE MIXED USE INFILL COMMUNITY CENTER HEATING, PROCESSING, TREATMENT SOLAR WATER HEATER FLY ASH CEMENT S3H01E V.TC GLASS BLACK WATER COSER TOW VALVE INSULATION TEA HOUSE COMMUNrrf ENTRANCE FLY ASH CEAUXT 33hcu:w:re GLASS BLACK WATER COVER METAL TRAY TOW VALVE FLY ASM CEMENT 33 HOLE WRE GLASS UETALTANX METAL TRAY TOILET VALVE SOLAR COOKER FLY ASM CEMENT 30 HOLE WIRE GLASS CAST IRON POT tNSULATOON SOLAR DRYER FLY ASM CEMENT 33 HOLE WIRE GLASS METAL TRAY SOLAR FRIG. 33 HOLE WIRE GLASS ATETAL TRAY METAL PIPE ZEOLTTE RESOURCE USE FROM LONGJU VILLAGE FIRST LEVEL TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF LAND USE INCENTIVES GAINED WHEN SOLAR TECHNOLOGIES AND BY-PRODUCT MATERIALS ARE DEVELOPED HEATER STU. PUMP COOKER DRYER FRIG. SECOND LEVEL INTENSIVE INTENSIVE INTENSIVE MEAT FISH FARMING VEGETABLE PRODUCTION USING SOLAR PRODUCTION USING SOLAR HEATHING. USING SOLAR DRYING AND DRYING, AND DRYING AND REFRIGERATION PUMPING COOKING THIRD LEVEL COMMERCIAL DIRECT SELUNG OF PRODUCE SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SALES METHANE TREATMENT AQUACULTURE MULTI-USE INDUSTRY FLY ASH CEMENT, METAL WIRE, AND GLASS FROM REGION ECONOMIC EXCHANGE WrTHIN AND WrTHOUT VILLAGE FURNRURE RESTAURANT SELLS FISH DINNER FISH FOOD HARVESTED WATER LABOR FISH FARMER USES SOLAR DRYER Emphasis was placed on developing a continuous superstructure as a structural framework for adding or subtracting infill walls or for attaching a variety of sustainable technologies. Walls were proposed using a range of agricultural waste products. The structure was to be manufactured using fly ash cement from coal-fired power plants, with the eventual transition to manufactured bamboo columns and beams. Utility oriented technologies that could also fit into this structure included water- related needs (water purification, water pumping, water heating), food preparation (solar dryers, solar stills, solar cooling, solar ovens), and intensive specialty food production (snails, grubs, insects, and other creatures that would quickly propagate within a small space). Local manufacturing procedures were proposed for both materials and labor. For example the solar pump, since it only had to pump from 30 feet, could easily be manufactured using ferro-cement tank technology. This was because the proposed solar pumping process was based on the diurnal heating and cooling of an atmospherically-closed tank system that would fill to two-thirds its volume each night as cooling occurred. The goal was to give the farmer access to a variety of vocational and small business options that would take advantage of their keen skills and inventiveness in the context of sustainable technologies.

Page 242

2002 LOCATION: Washington, DC; Austin, Texas CLIENT: University of Texas School of Architecture FUNDING: Warren Skaaren Charitable Trust; University of Texas School of Architecture; U.S. Department of Energy; Transcon (SIP panels); Unistrut (structural steel); Airstream, All Seasons Commercial (windows), BioRadiant Energy Inc. (ice battery), BP Solar, and other corporate donors PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III, Michael Garrison (faculty leads); Jerry Garcia (structural engineering); Luke Brown, Eli Mosley, Randall Notgrass, Chris Rowe, Melanie Schopper (construction crew); UT School of Architecture Students CMPBS teamed with the University of Texas School of Architecture to participate in the first U.S. Department of Energy-sponsored Solar Decathlon. The event features 10 contests that measure the energy, water, transportation, environmental quality, market appeal, and livability performance of each team’s entry. Designed by the student-faculty team to function entirely off-grid for energy and water, the competition spans 10-days following a 6 day period to construct the buildings on the Washington, DC mail. The entry is now located on the Center’s grounds in Austin, and is open to the public as part of our monthly First Friday Open House. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOLAR DECATHLON

Page 250

2002 & 2006 LOCATION: Austin, Texas CLIENT: Stratus Properties FUNDING: Stratus Properties ESCARPMENT VILLAGE PROJECT TEAM: Gail Vittori: Mary Petrovich; Alex Stadtner; Rachel Stone BLOCK 21 PROJECT TEAM; Gail Vittori; Dylan Siegler; Margaret Chandler; Rachel Dewane; Cassidy Ellis; Adele Houghton; Lauren Jones; Bill Reed For decades Austin has had a robust dynamic between neighborhood organizations, environmentalists and developers regarding where and how and whether to develop. In the context of a particularly divisive stand off regarding land development in environmentally sensitive southwest Austin in 2002, CMPBS met with the principals of Stratus Properties to explore what might be a basis for collaboration. At one of the early meetings, CMPBS introduced a DVD that recounted how, many decades prior, developers were viewed as civic leaders, providing homes, places of commerce and infrastructure while advancing the public good. What groundwork could be laid to redefine and redirect the adversarial relationship? Through development of the first green building restrictive covenants in central Texas, the resulting Escarpment Village boasts some of the highest retail sales ratios and valuations in the region while being a visible example that any retail establishment—from a small locally-owned postal delivery shop to national retail chains and a large grocery market—can meet and even exceed what were at the time considered aggressive green building requirements. Builders with no prior experience with green building came to embrace the green and healthier materials and methods after initially expressing doubts about whether the requirements were achievable or affordable. Retail tenants came to see the value in the greening expressed in higher than average sales per square foot and customer experience and satisfaction, and proceeded to replicate the requisite green strategies in subsequent tenant fit outs even though other locations didn’t require them. Several years hence, new opportunities such as the 1.1 million square foot Block 21 mixed use project, begun in 2006, continued CMPBS’ engagement with Stratus Properties albeit at a much larger scale and for a distinct complement of uses including hotel, condominiums, and Austin City Limits’ 2500 seat venue and recording studio. Located in Austin’s Central Business District, Block 21 represents the largest project pursuing LEED certification in central Texas, and is expected to be the first mixed-use tower in Texas to achieve any level of LEED certification. ESCARPMENT VILLAGE & BLOCK 21

Page 252

Escarpment Village In 2002, the Center met with the principals of Austin-based Stratus Properties to establish green building protocols for a planned retail development in environmentally sensitive southwest Austin. What began as an unexpected and rare expression of interest from the development community at the time has evolved into successive collaborations to establish meaningful and measurable accomplishments at a scale for which few visible examples exists in this region. The initial engagement resulted in the first green building restrictive covenants for a retail development in central Texas; guidance and oversight on the implementation of the restrictive covenants during active development and tenant fit-out; and a vibrant 168,000 square foot neighborhood-based retail center where every building aligns with an ambitious protocol requiring enhanced stormwater management and treatment; night sky protection; compliance with the City’s native plant-dominated Grow Green list, prohibiting invasive plants; minimum 20% reduced energy and water use relative to code; minimum 50% diversion of construction debris by weight; provision for storage and collection of recyclables; a minimum 25% recycled content and 20% local/regional materials (by cost); low-emitting adhesives, sealants, paints and coatings, carpet, and all composite wood free of added urea-formaldehyde, to name a few. While these efforts seem mundane eight years later, at the time they represented a bold pragmatism to shape a development around principles that fundamentally respond to place and people, while creating a financially successful development. Green Development Guiding Principles (2002) Site Strategies

1. Design With Nature Specify climate- and site-responsive design strategies and features to maximize building self-reliance and minimize ecological harm on multiple scales.
2. Design For Water Quality Minimize stormwater run-off by reducing impervious surfaces, installing rainwater harvesting systems and green roofs, and designing swales and appropriate set-backs integrated into a healthy landscape. For properties in the recharge zone, design for no net increase of stormwater runoff rates over existing conditions.
3. Design To Maximize Open Space Cluster development and hardscapes to preserve undisturbed open space and protect critical environmental features.
4. Design To Reduce Vehicle Miles Design for mixed uses, providing walkable distances between residential, retail and office, and pedestrian and bicycle pathways to accommodate transportation needs. Link destination points throughout the development and incorporate park and ride, vanpool, car sharing, and access to public transportation and incentives for employers to hire from Stratus Circle C neighborhoods.
5. Design With Native Plant Landscapes and Maintain with Organic Methods and Materials Specify plant species indigenous to the Edwards Aquifer watershed and employ organic gardening methods eliminating use of toxic pesticides and herbicides. Prohibit turf on retail and office sites and limit residential lawns to native turf/groundcovers.
6. Design For Food Production Where permitted by zoning, designate lot - end neighborhood-scale gardens for individual and community food production.
7. Design For Diversity Provide for variety of development densities, building types (commercial, residential, neighborhood-scale retail, institutional) and household income levels on individual tracts.
8. Design For Community Design community common places to engender social interaction, such as shared mailboxes, community composting centers, community recycling/reuse centers (as permitted by zoning), community gardens and recreation areas that promote shared picnic and sports activities. Design Strategies
9. Design With Flexibility Anticipate change in user needs by designing open building systems.
10. Design For Human Scale Establish appropriate square foot parameters that provide efficient and sufficient space allocations relative to user needs
11. Design With Integrated Process and Systems Establish multi-discipline design decision process and optimize the efficiencies of complementary building elements.
12. Design For Indoor Environmental Quality Design for daylight as primary light source, provide occupants access to views, and optimize natural and mechanical ventilation and air conditioning systems while eliminating sources . of indoor pollution.
13. Design With Healthy Materials Specify materials that are non-toxic, resist mold, eliminate emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and are not responsible for the release of persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs) through the life cycle.
14. Design With Durable Materials Specify materials that are long-lasting and minimize maintenance and repair requirements.
15. Design With Regional Materials Specify environmentally-sound building materials and products that are sourced and manufactured within a 500- mile radius of building site thereby supporting the regional economy.
16. Design For Resource Efficiency Employ strategies that achieve greater energy and water efficiency than comparable buildings in Central Texas.
17. Design For Renewable Energy Integrate appropriately-scaled renewable energy technologies for water heating and electrical generation, and secure long-term contracts for grid-connected “green” energy where available through the provider.
18. Design For Waste Minimization Employ strategies to reduce, reuse, recycle, and compost construction, demolition and land-clearing debris, and design buildings to facilitate recycling during operations.

Page 253

DEMONSTRATING ESCARPMENT VILLAGE’S ENVIRONMENTAL / HEALTH BENEFITS AS A RESULT OF ACHIEVABLE STANDARDS BUILDING STRATEGY PROJECT GOAL RESULTS IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL / HEALTH BENEFITS Energy Reduction Reduce energy use by at least 20% Every completed building has met this goal! 368,701 kWh saved, resulting in reduction of pollution per year: CO,: 528,717 lbs so; 304 lbs NOx: 320 lbs Hg: 717 Milligrams Taking 62 cars off the road Saving 32,439 gallons of gas Saving 662 ban-els of oil Growing 7,303 tree seedlings for 10 years Preserving 2.33 acres of forest Water Conservation Optional: reduce potable water use by 20% 2/3 completed buildings met or surpassed this goal, resulting in 25% water use reduction Water saved per year: 784,650.70 gallons Saves enough to supply 23 Americans with water for one year. Waste Diverted / Recycled Divert 50% of waste from landfills Diverted a total of 94.35% waste from landfills Total waste diverted: 1,283,144 lbs Equivalent to Saving 341,389 gallons of gas Saving 7,313 barrels of oil Taking 613 passengers off the road Recycled Content 25% (of cost) of building materials contain recycled content 48% (of cost) materials of completed buildings contain recycled content Local Materials 25% (of cost) of building materials manufactured within 500 miles 40% (of cost) of materials of completed buildings are manufactured within 500 miles Every mile not traveled offsets CO: 0.04418 1b CO2: 0.8 lb VOC: 304 lbs NO : 0.00278 lb

Page 254

Block 21 Stratus Properties’ Block 21, a $300 million, 1.1 million square foot mixed use development in Austin’s Central Business District created a distinct opportunity to explore green design and construction on a massive scale. With Andersson-Wise leading the architectural team, the 37 story project will feature an entire city block of mixed-use development including the W Hotel & Residences (159 condominiums and 252 guestrooms), the 2,500-capacity Austin City Limits music venue and studio, as well as retail and meeting space, a spa, bars and restaurants, and thousands of square feet of office space. Block 21 will become a visible and striking downtown example of green writ large. Abundant daylight, healthy materials, water-conserving fixtures, connection to a district cooling system and a green operations program are some of the defining green elements. Dovetailing with the projects focus on wellness, indoor environmental quality is a priority. Low-emitting adhesives, sealants, paints, carpet and other materials contribute to healthy, high-quality indoor air. Both living and work spaces are designed to maximize access to outdoor views and daylight while minimizing energy use, and interior lighting is one-third more energy efficient than code requires. CMPBS worked with the project team early on to commit to specifying water fixtures indoors and outdoors that save water without sacrificing functionality or good design. The 1.5 gallon per minute shower fixtures in the hotel are custom made and represent the most efficient shower fixtures at any W Hotel, helping the project to reduce projected water use by more than 30%. CMPBS was engaged from the outset to lead sustainable design goal-setting, facilitating charrettes to establish the team’s priorities collaboratively and then guide the incorporation of green principles into the design, construction, and operations plans. The project is pursuing LEED certification; throughout the multi-year process, CMPBS has managed the project’s LEED strategy and documentation process. Opening is scheduled for December 2010. Envisioning a Green Block 21 (2006) Cities are at the fulcrum of defining global environmental health for the 21st century. Urban areas account for about 50% percent of the Earth’s population, estimated to increase to more than 60% by 2030. Urban development should be sensitive to, and respond to, the life cycle of place, with design informed by site, climate, nature, resource cycles, people and aesthetic delight. In this way. Block 21 becomes the physical manifestation of the richness of the urban metabolism and vitality of the human experience. Indoor Environmental Quality Substantial research documents the relationship between indoor environmental quality, human health and productivity. By providing abundant daylight and views, healthy darkness, and healthy building materials, the interior environment becomes a regenerative respite from conventional hotel and office spaces. Living plants serve as an effective biological air filtration system while affirming the inherent human need to connect to the natural environment, referred to as biophilia. This theme is also exemplified in the creation of outdoor rooms that will provide a sense of expansiveness and connection to nature. Air Quality Austin’s air quality has exceeded the federal ozone standard in recent years, leading to the potential for non-attainment status. By creating a green oasis in the heart of downtown Austin, Block 21 s vegetation will serve as an air filter, contributing to healthy air quality. Additionally, transportation options, such as encouraging hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles and providing bicycles, will dramatically reduce the carbon footprint associated with conventional modes of transport. Urban Heat Island Urban areas are characterized as having temperatures 6-F — 8-F higher than undeveloped areas, caused by dark, impervious surfaces that absorb the sun’s energy rather than reflecting it back into the atmosphere. The warmer temperatures are stressful to people, wildlife and plants, and mechanical equipment. Moreover, warmer temperatures accelerate ground-level ozone formation, a precursor of smog. These conditions diminish ambient air quality and can exacerbate respiratory ailments. Light colored surfaces coupled with shade and vegetation mitigate the urban heat island effect, resulting in healthier ambient air. Water Hotels use, on average, more than 215 gallons per room per day. Water-efficient fixtures are able to reduce usage and associated bills by 25 to 30 percent. Austin’s long-term drought conditions are a stimulus for aggressive water reduction strategies, while maintaining desirable customer experience. Energy In a 2000 report by the Alliance to Save Energy, hotels represent the fourth most intensive energy user among the U.S. commercial sector, representing an average of $500 per room per year for fuel and electricity. Reduced energy use is possible through off-the-shelf energy saving strategies without compromising the quality of customer experience.

Page 256

2004 LOCATION: unbuilt FUNDING: self-funded PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Kurt Brethauer; John Byrd; Jeff Chapman; Michael Mallow; Hollie Scott; Peter Stair The head of the planning commission for Beijing posed a challenge for us — design a hypothetical village located in Beijing for creative artists and engineers. Utilizing this idea, the Center entered a poster for the U.S. Green Building Council s national conference in Seattle. The contents of the poster was built upon the biome-metrics of place (i.e. connecting place to similar ecological and resource patterns throughout the world). After mapping these patterns, it was discovered that Texas could actually relate to specific areas of China, allowing an information exhange network based on how the ecological relevance of sustainable technologies could operate in other similar places. We found, however, that while Texas has ten ecological zones, China has 39. Texas virtually disappeared inside China but we found correlations between the two and the system, for all intents and purposes, worked. Through this research, we discovered things about China that have now turned out to be crucial in our work, particularly the MgO cement construction that China has been doing for centuries (used in association with the terra cotta soldiers in Xi’an, Shaanxi province). TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE

Page 258

BIOME REGIONS MAJOR AGRICULTURAL REGIONS EVAPORATION SOIL ENGINEERING ELEVATION VEGETATION REGIONS AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS AVERAGE ANNUAL TEMPERATURE AVERAGE ANNUAL HUMIDITY 0

Page 259

HEUX SOIL DESCRIPTION LOW IMPACT FOUNDATIONS -CONJlNya^ FOOTING FOAM Pffl-TiN^IONW COLUMN LOW IMPACT FOUNDATIONS STRUCTURE STRUCTURALLY INSULATED R^NELS MAGNESIUM OXIDE RECONS MATERIALS DeFieii MAEUNECUMATE GLASS + h<ASS TRmfll£:V\yU.L MASS GLASS +INSULATION tHE AIAL OmWEV INSULATION OESICANT ♦ INSULATION GLASS INSULATION . OESICANT PVUOXFtCjUlCN OESICANT ARID CLIMATE PRECIPITATION MOST 0F™eYEAR MOIST CONTINENTAL SUB TROPICAL CUIAATE MOIST SUBTROPICAL MIO LATITUDE CI (MATE MOIST SUBTROmCAL HUMID SUnmOPICAL UO Ct MATE PRECIPITATION MOSTOT THE YEAR 120| 110 100 90 80 40 30 10 20 30 40 60 70 80 RELATIVE HUMIDnY(%) a: I COMFORT ZONE- BO 100 1^ 1 60

Page 264

Community Supported Architecture for Katrine and Rita Flood Victims (2005) 2005 LOCATION: prototype in Jackson, MS CLIENT: The Kenclecla Fund FUNDING: The Kendeda Fund PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III; Gail Vittori; Michael Camacho; David Dewane; Rachel Dewane; Conley Giles; Ben Phillips, Jeremy Vemke CSA ag (Community Supported Agriculture) is a well documented success story related to supplying families of all types with a means of producing healthy and environmentally sound food using local farmers to cooperatively supply food to their neighbors. It is estimated that the technique has served 368 communities throughout North America and many others abroad. The procedure of a C.S.A’arch (Community Supported Architecture) develops from this success story but does so in the area of producing healthy community manufactured housing and other small buildings required by the breadth of needs represented by rural communities in times of disaster and when community development is necessary. The project incorporates a production approach towards building through community cooperation, volunteerism, training, local business support, and a goal of upgrading the manner in wHeh buildings are delivered to the user in a fashion that is both economical for the user and environmentally safe. COMMUNITY SUPPORTED ARCHITECTURE

Page 266

NETWORK RESOURCES Resources and Manufacturers Ufe Cyclo Linkage ---------mm, --------TOTtay POINT RESOURCES n

Resources and Manufacturers Ffenlto n TOre FUrt! AREA RESOURCES Mississippi Land frtatad TVrtoteto Roo TIrtMafto Opmludi tail. The procedure involves several distinct parts in order to operate: The designed and engineered incremental building system that uses a set of simple protocols for component compatibility so that a wide range of materials and methods are possible. This is due to the high degree of inter-operability in the sharing of fastening systems, utility installation, and energy conservation procedures that all vendor participants must meet to become a manufacturing partner. All components are designed and engineered to be both user friendly and economical due to an as needed, pay as you grow, basis. The technique is not the usual modular home procedure often associated with a building system, but is specifically tailored to small contractors and owner builders 2 A pre-manufactured Community Based Manufacturing (CBM) facility using the proposed building system itself. The facility is made up of highly available, yet sophisticated, manufacturing procedures coordinated into an efficient production system that becomes complementary to existing regional building procedures. The facility also provides transportation necessary to deliver housing modules for do-it-yourself applications within the immediate region. 3. The necessary materials and other components to house a team of volunteer personnel, students, and interns to build their own temporary High Impact Housing (HIH) and other structures within the relief area, both for the practical need of housing core personnel thus relieving the community itself of this burden, but to also engender a sense of confidence as well as the interactive experience of living within the structures being presented as solutions to the community. An inventory and incorporation of local businesses (Community based Business Support — CBS) in the region being impacted so that manufacturing methods, skills, and procedures filter economically and informationally into the community from the start. 5 Spatial Simulation Planning Kit (SSPK): where users can plan their own structures according their needs, including showing the advantages of building as you grow from an economic standpoint. Fast economical and healthy building procedures: The GroHome / GoHome procedure of community building is based on proven methods that together provide the most advanced building methods available from foundation to roof. Most of the methods use simple manufacturing procedures which can easily be introduced into existing practices. Building technologies are screened for economical manufacturability and the use of sustainable practices (including high recycled content and/or their ability to utilize local resources). In addition, the system is configured to enable the user to incrementally add to the structure creating a degree of self-control financially and, in time, the ability to adapt to the broadest of economic conditions.

Page 267

GROHo R0Rt| Fam”yPr°f”efffffo |tf it Hs Household Equity Greening of the Infrastructure RAINWATER IS AN INEXPENSIVE, SAFE f::;: source for gray , WATER SUITABLE for:. WATER COLLECTION DESIGNING WnH NATURE CAN INCREASETHE QUALHY OF SPACE WHILE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY CONSUMED. CLIMATIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS: FLOOD ZONES SOIL TOXICITY LANDFILL PROXIMITY DRINKING WATER AIR QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE INVOLVMENT IN THE DESIGN AND BUILD PROCESS ALLOWS THE • • INDIVIDUAL THE FREEDOM m ffiTO SHAPE THEIR OWN I.IhOME AND COMMUNITY. PARTICIPATORY DESIGN IN THE PROCESS OF RECONSTRUCTION, IT IS AS IMPORTANT TO MEND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMBIT AS IT IS TO REBILD. ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION^ to CREATION OF WETLANDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF WASTEWATER. Gohome Urban Revitalization WATER AND ENERGY BALANCE BUYING LOCAL BUILDING PRODUCTS AND USING LOCAL LABOR CREATES JOBS AND STRENGTHENS THE 14 REGIONAL ECONOMY. LOCAL ECONOMY FACIUTY. BUILT IN THE COMMUNFIY. THAT PRODUCES AND DISTRIB- 1 UTES STANDARDIZED n BUILDING COMPONENTS FOR RECONSTURCTION. COMMUNITY BASED MANUFACTURING BUILDING OVER TIME ENABLES PEOPLE AND THE ARCHITECTURE TO RESPOND 1 TO CHANGES IN THE HOME ^AND COMMUNmr. ■1 BUILDING OVER TIME TIME. MONEY, AND RESOURCE POTENTIALS ARE MAXIMIZED WHEN WORKING WITH A COMMON, EFFICIENT BUILDING STRATEGY. EFFICIENT BUILDING METHODS

Page 268

BREEZE KITCHEN SLEEPING BATH STORAGE FURNITURE MISO KIb M1 M2 K2 B3 WINTER SUN ST3 B4 FAT WALL LEGEND Kia KITCHENETTE W/ COMPACT REF. KIb KITCHENETTE WI STANDUP REF. K2 CABINETRY AND COUNTER TOP 51 QUEEN BED W/ CLOSET S2 TWIN BED W/ DESK AND CLOSET S3 DAYBED/SOFA S4 BUNK BEDS B1 HALF-BATH W/ STORAGE B2 WET-ROOM B3 WET-ROOM W/ SINK B4 FULL BATH W/ SHOWER ST1 CLOTHES AND SHELF STORAGE ST2 CLOTHES AND WASHER/DRYER ST3 LOCKED EXTERIOR STORAGE F1 DINING TABLE W/ STORAGE F2 SCREENED SEAT W/ DRAWERS M1 FAT SPACE M2 PASSIVE SOLAR/BREEZE HEADER SUMMER SUN ROOFING COLUMNS FATWALLS WALLS FLOORING LIGHT FOUNDATIONS A1L L L4 4 WOOD LIGHT GAUGE © RECYCLED PLASTIC Q KOIIPH A HOT ROLLED V STEEL O GLUE-LAM ] RIGID INSULATION CONCRETE d PLASTIC LUMBER 400 s.f. prefab unit vqth the | addition of Fatwalls to maximize space and flexibility. Addition of inferior and exterior living space to existing mobile home.

Page 269

The GoHome building approach is based on retrofitting eco-systems with a building system that is regionally based, encourages strong local economies, is mindful of the future, and revitalizes the human understanding of the essential attributes of place and community. We work under the precept that the sustainability of our actions is measured by the continuous flow of our most ambient recourses, and GoHome achieves this on a global level simply because it responds to and promotes the natural advantages of local regions. The basic premise of GoHome is to re-adapt ourselves to what is fundamentally involved in the creation of home and community. GoHome places the responsibility on citizens to create socially, environmentally, and economically stable environments. This method appreciates that the character and aesthetic of community are not preordained but are a result of democratic process. GoHome simply provides the tools and means whereupon home and community are derived. In order to accomplish this, we have had to develop a framework consisting of various principles. This starts with an understanding and taking inventory of the ambient resources around us. We are also concerned with a flexible building system, composed of modular units, that must be easy for the user to alter to fit his or her own needs. This requirement in turn presupposes that all aspects of the building are understandable from an assembly standpoint, and weigh the right amount to optimize human power capacities. A GoHome’s components are easily disengaged from one another so that the alteration of a single element does not necessitate the alteration of many others. In this technologically advanced way of thinking, waste is minimized because the system is geared to creative alteration and reuse, which in turn creates opportunity for vernacular identity. Now we are beginning to understand the basis of providing a 21st century building product that is friendly to the future as well as the present; This method of building is inextricably joined to the economics of the household, the community, and the region. A sound building growing over time translates to ones equity growing over time. A unified building system coupled with.a return to relying on local ambient resources will, with proper planning and coordination, spin off new manufacturing networks and micro industries - this is true in low-tech or high-tech scenarios. With intelligence and communication, it is plausible to foresee these manufacturers working in concert with each other to support closed-loop production cycles, dramatically reducing the nauseating waste that has become synonymous with industrial production in “developed countries.” GoHome is realistic and promising because it is rooted in an understanding of natural life cycles. We must realize that the source, processing, using, and re-sourcing of our buildings can and should be conceived of in a way that is healthy, environmentally responsible, and economically viable. GoHome is a vision of the future that looks to achieve a harmonious union with nature, rather than twist nature to fit our ephemeral needs.

Page 272

Unlike most solar decathlon efforts, our work with Texas A&M Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Planning proved to have a degree of relevancy on almost all fronts — from material life cycles to our most recent work using life cycle phases as events that lead the user through everyday rituals of completing resource flows into regenerative environments. Because A&M is most known for its evidence-based design work within the Health Systems Design program, it was natural to expand this work into what we called evidence-based economic design — meaning that we wanted to respond in the design process to where a families monthly and annual financial assets were spent. We therefore responded directly to five areas of economic activity. Some financial resources were spent on the home and land but the most was spent on the cost of the money itself (meaning that if the home environment could evolve with needs and was paid off at each increment, the family could save considerably over a thirty year mortgage). The second expenditure was that of transportation. To answer this, we responded by designing a facility that could eventually act as new type of garage equipped with solar PVs but also set up for a V2G 9 vehicle-to-grid and G2V 9 grid-to-vehicle setup where you could use the new generation of hybrids to power the home or feedback into the grid and obtain payment. The transportation became a financial benefit instead of a drain. We were surprised to find the next highest expenditure was food. A solar heated green house was provided as part of the veranda to lower food bills. Energy and water were the fourth highest expenses. To satisfy this, we provided a plug-and-play evolving photovoltaic system that could respond to the family income and changing tax credits. The water was set to drain into decorative landscape ponds through an asquia grid of drainage canals designed into the deck. The landscape became the icon for a health due to the fact that the common yard in the United States has become a toxic soup of chemical pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. Our solution was a living machine using bats for the insects and guano collected for composting use in the garden. Our economic “model” included a consciousness of how important design and symbols could be when correlated to some astute electronics coupled with remindful icons that represented the sequence that was necessary in our daily lives to connect limited sources to the use of water, food, and electricity so that our habits are connected to the performance boundaries of a sustainable home environment. 2007 LOCATION: Washington, DC; San Antonio, Texas CLIENT: Texas A&M University College of Architecture FUNDING: Texas A&M Foundation; U.S. Department of Energy; National Renewable Laboratory; private foundations; Apricus Solar Thermal, Suntech America, Hunter Douglas, Alpen Windows and other corporate donors PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III, Jeff Haberl, Leslie Feigenbaum (Texas A&M faculty); Aaron Cloninger; David Dewane; Ariel Fisk-Vittori; Texas A&M students Proposal for Solar Decathlon (2007) The Design for Life - Solar Decathlon entry is conceived as a visually rich home that functions as a living system utilizing the life cycles of our human support systems as a means to connect the user to important living support functions. The objective is to literally fold human life support functions into visually recognizable processes. This connects ambient resources and their cycles to establish a mainstay of the biophilia approach to the design that is a strong underpinning of our school’s demonstrated expertise. Biophilia can promote a condition of adaptive behavior according to the availability of life support resources (e.g., energy, air, water, food, waste, light, materials). Building integrated energy systems include: passive solar and solar Photovoltaics (PV’s) demonstrate how the sun operates at multiple levels by including PV solar water heating and space heating integration, PV night time re-radiation cooling, solar distillation water recycling, light shelf and tinted colored light using transparent PV’s in key locations such as above kitchen counters and in bathroom areas. Together, these building integrated approaches enable this entry to become practical as well as playful all accentuating the wonders of sunlight. The Design for Life - Life Cycle Design procedure is both an important use of the capabilities of the college, (Energy Lab, Evidence Based Design, Landscape Architecture, Visualization) but also offers a unique means of separating the manufacturing and testing responsibilities of key system components into contiguous performance processes (Life of Air, Life of Water, Life of Energy, etc). Life cycle themes cover all areas of basic life support and are visually expressive in design and other control means. They represent all phases of a given life support cycle. The goal is to create a striking and useful design based on an assembly of life cycle components and processes working in consort with the opportunities to adapt the American cultural ideal of what makes a home into a more sustainable experience. TEXAS A&M SOLAR DECATHLON

Page 274

Texas A&M Solar Decathlon □ Shelter ■ Energy □ Health □ Visualization □ Marketing
1 Solar Carport AgroEnergy system, including a fun set of electrank controls for a two-way grid connection, or for direct use by the home (V2G, G2V capable), with intent to attach Energy Ports to any home. 2 Building Integrated Wind System A small patio-mounted wind system used in our breeze corridor to complement the other solar energy cycles. 3 Reflecting Pond Acts as a heat sink and provides psychological relief during the summer. 4 SoiarThennal Fence A beat-optimizing, solar heat source that is separate from the actual structure to enable better thermal control of the space without depending exclushrely on direct gain, therefore gaining more predictable thermal comfort 5 Studio A groSpace dedicated to provide opportunities to explore and team while having fun. On display are a certain number of carefully chose, and descriptive objects of Texan culture, books, models, and an Interactive game to engage alL 6 High Efficiency BIPV One of the Building Integrated Photo Voltaic (BIPV) systCTi module types, this system takes advantage of both the summer and the winter sun. 7 Light Reflecting BIFV One of the Building Integrated Photo Voltaic (BIPV) system module types, this pitched, medium performance, translucent system installed over the south clearstory acts as daylight modulator, gently shading the harsh southern fight 8 Light-Thru BIPV One of the Building Integrated Photo Voltaic (BIPV) system module types, the easy to install, low performance, vertical see-though BIPVs enable a sRght shade to the south wall without sacrificing view. 9 Grassland Biome Simulation Our potted grasses serve as a fun reminder of where we live: the central grassland biome of North America. 10 Bat Tower The Installation of a bat tower allows for the decrease of the intensity of insects, as well as provide a healthy, sustainable fertilizer for the Food Garden. 11 Food Garden Aluminum frame gardens allow for self growth of food incorporated as part of the design solution as a healthy alternative to purchasing food, as well as additional carbon offsets. 12 Acequia The manner in which the landscape is planned borrows from tl>e historical president of the soon-to-be World Heritage site of the acequia drainage system between missions in San Antonio, Texas; the system Is depicted between the patio modules in the form of a river stone drainage pattern. Energy Inane groXoCT-UtuUr upeiJ CCTWOAe iffteratf preduci cra<

Page 275

Shelter 1 argue that the construction and maintenance of adequate housing, at prices people can afford, depends on the investment erf resources which households themselves control, John EC Turner. HotAing by PROp!? the groSystem of Componenets the groCommunity The groBuildlng System is based on the Idea of Incremental expansion. By viewing the space between structures and Incorporating planned infill, we grow beyond the tingle family groHcme Into the groCbmmunIty, where the ideas of growth and adaptablfity continue beyond the individual and address the needs of a community. New Orleans groCommunity the groHome The groHome is designed to anticipate changing needs of the building owner and allow for upgrades, replacements, and enhancements. The oveotl goal is to optimize not only the total cost of ownership but the total cost of life style. The cost of shelter is only part of this. Transportation, food, and energy costs are also significant expenses. Our SoUr Decathlon groHome responds to this by reducing transportation costs, reducing waste disposal, conserving water resources, and producing food at a local level. New Orleans groHome Texas MM SoUr DecatNen groHcme the groCore The groCore Is a modular, welded steel frame that mimics growth. A quickly installed core with trailer axles for transport, the groCore provides a chassis for further expansion. It Is designed to conform to a strict module with specially designed connections at its joints. This facilitates expansion and Improvement of the building using additional building system components. The ability to grow Is how we derive our building’s name: groHome. groSpaces are a kit of parts that are Incrementally added to the groCore. They are an extension of the module that composes the groCore, and can be added to any area around the groHome. The groSpaces on our Solar Decathlon groHome function as a garage, which Indudes vehlde-to-grid technology that further addresses our energy needs, and a studio which provides a spatial extention to the house. Both groSpaces allow for an extension of solar panels onto the root the groWalls groWalls™ are fatwall™ attachments to the groCore, groSpaces, and cantilever support spaces for interior space effidency. These groWalW can be manufactured differently, out of molded plasUc steel, and aluminum, and are dimensioned to meet the groCore module and additional protocols. Over 20 groWall prototypes have been developed, from an exercise area to a green house to an energy production groWall™. The Solar Decathlon groWalls serve multiple functions, Induding a kitchen, entertainment area, bathroom, bedroom extension, HVAC, and energy needs. Energy groWall Kitcheo groWall Entertainment groWall Bathroom groWall MeOwucalgroWaO Bedroom groWall the groComponents The groHome bunding system is based upon a library of components that defines our Do-It-Yourself manner of construction. The pieces are premanufactured, brought to site, and assembled quickly, easily, and effidenily. The structure Is built byacomblnatlon of components literally growing off of each other, allowing the groHome to expand at any rate dictated by the needs ofits occupant All connections are bolted, which allows for components to be ‘unplugged”without difficulty or damage to the component, which would diminish that component’s value and recyclability. the groJoint The graJoint™ hthe bask component of the groBuildlng System. Two separate beams are hooked onto the welded studs of the groloint and then are bolted together to create the groBeam. The groCoturan is slipped orer the groJoint and then secured by bolts on all four sides. The groJoint Is designed to recede a beam on four sides and column or foundation on the top and bottom. The cutouts in the groJoim allow ail the utiTroes for the building to be run trough the joint and into the beams and the columns. Ths system allows for easy access to and repair of utity Unes. Texas A&M Solar Decathlon . solar.tamu.edu

Page 276

Energy “A fundamental distinction in the nature of technologies — solar or otherwise — hinges on their ability to become components In what might be called Industrial ecosystems. Much of this potential depends on their inherent capacity to be integrative with other technologies or simply resource conserving in and of themselves…Energy conservation is essentially the result of highly efficient systems working together, rather than as disparate machines optimized for a single purpose.” Pliny Fisk & Gail Vittori, Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems passive Systems Heating & Cooling Operable clerestory windows enable Interior ventilation of the groHome™ and allow outside breezes to be deflected gently into and out of the space by a light wing / breeze wing. Spatial organization of the solar thermal fence and the game room creates a breezeway, circulating wind Into and around the house. Daylighting Tlie derestory windows surrounding the groCore supply the light wing with light for even distribution In the north and south areas of the groHome™. The large, thermally sophisticated north glazing wall provides a spectrally cool northern light source without glare. 1 Operable Clerestory Windows 2 Ught WIng 3 North Glazing Wall 1 operable Clerestory Windows 2 LightWing 1 Sobrlhennal Panels 2 North Glazing Wall 3 Dog Trot active Systems SolarThermal System Our active solar thermal system provides both domestic hot water and space heating.This system indudes a fence of vertically-mounted evacuated tube solar heat collectors - separate from the core, a thermally Insulated hot water storage tank, heat erchangen. pumps, controls, and electric water heater and an AC/heat pump unit for back up water heating and space heating. Solar Thermal Collectors Photo Voltaic System We use energy from two different types of Building Integrated Photo Voltaic (BiPV) system modules In our groHome™. Numbtf Eftidency offends Total kW 1 High Efficiency BIPV System U.t% 36 6.1 kW 2 Light Thru BIPV System 24 Cells S^6 32 Cells 7J% 6 40 CeIlS 92% 6 1.4 KW Lighting Angle adjustable LED lights that are installed at the bases of the derestory windows illuminate the groHome Interior evenly at night, using the same light wing that enables our extensive daylighting. The LEDs also allow for area specific lighting when needed. 1 Operable Clerestory Windows 2 Angle Adjustable LED 3 Ught Wing The B1PV panels connect through four DC charge controllers, 24 of 2 volt batteries; 4 DC / AC Inverters, and an AC distribution panel before becoming the usable electridty In outlets, and create a total of 75 kW of renewable solar energy. > Texas A&MSolar Decathlon solar.tamu.edu

Page 277

Energy adaptive Strategies Thermal Zoning By using the age old principal of thermally zonable space, our system of modularity can attain thermal comfort by curtaining off whole nodules of three-dimensional spaces and extenor surfaces (reducing surface by 50% and volume by 40%) Heat Conservation: The main living area d curtained off for heating. Thermal Light Curtain System & Light Wing The technologically sophisticated thermal light curtain system that wraps around the clerestory windows has the potential to sense the amount and intensity of light and adjust itself accordingly. It works with the adjustable light wing, which changes angles to reduce glare and uneven lighting of the Interior space. Clerestory Thermal Curtains Thermal Curtains Shading Options Unadjusted UghtWing Adjusted light Wing future Options Vehicle to Grid Energy We have the option of using vehicle to grid (V2G) technology to produce additional energy for our groHorne outside of die sobi grid, by use of a hybrid car. Greenhouse Thermal SoUr thermal energy can be codecred In the geenhouses along the the south of the groHorne’. and can be used to provide heating for interior spaces. Wind Energy Soul patbrnoOTed wind systems can be used In our brae oridor to complcmert me other s&rerergy cycles depending on the Canute. Typical Seasonal Shift of Solar & Wind groEnergy groEnergy Is d fundamental part of the “gro’concept that enables a family to start a home at their own level of financial needs from spatial, thermal and solar electric points of view. Our groHorne™ Includes an Energy Port garage for the future V2G and G2V hybrid car attachable to every American home. Other energy expansion options are available through ourgroBullding System. IndudIng the Installation of additional solar panels and a larger solar thermal fence, creating a total, all encompassing.solar build out. solar.tamu.edu Begin with the groHome’-s Solar Carport and Sohr Studio Texas A&MSolar Decathlon

Page 278

Health •BiophUQ If It exists, and I believe It exists, Is the Innately emotional affiliation of human beings to other living organisms…[It Is) part of ultimate human nature, Edward 0. Wilson, “Blophllia and the Conservation Ethic” The Blophllla Hypothesis Life Cycle Balancing Our groHome™ examines the Ufe Cyde Balancing of resources used on site In terms of energy, water, and food. We are able to trade and examine these cydes throughout all aspects of the building. This Increased awareness of where our resources come from enables us to foster our own beliavioral responsibility by reconnecting to the natural cydes that support us, while redudng the building’s resource footprint ra Carbon Balancing Special rare was taken with the groHome™ to ensure the achievement of a healthy carbon balance, which Is an integral part of sustainable design that should not be overlooked. With the use of healthy materials, such as various woods native to Texas, we are able to offset the amount of carbon produced by the manufacturing of steel elements. • A carbon dioxide Intensity ratio (CDIR) is the ratio between the net upstream CO, Impact (emissions minus stooge > CO,* — CD,, of a material and the weigM of the material. • A material with a poihlve OMRba net CO, source and one with a negative COIR banet CD, sink. Sources: Richard MacMath. -Carbon Otaode InteraOy Ratios’ Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Inc Aunm.Texas Il J. the BatTower Our bat tower serves a multi-functional purpose as a form of integrated pest management, and as a water fertilization method. Bats live off of the insects that disturb us, including mosquitoes that contribute to West Nile Virus, a major problem in CentralTexas. We use the bat guano as fertilizer for the landscape, takify the place of chemicals, and re-estabTishlng a nature-based connection to the life cycle of food. Lawn Facts • In the Ul residential lawns dccouni foc ZO minion acres of ld nd. • Lawn and garden equipment contribules to air pollution, including release ofVOCs that lead to health dedne and global climate change — in the Washington DC metropolrUn area. VOC releases equal about 55 tons per day.

• More than 55 baton is spent on chemical teUizen. most of which runs off due to Inappropriate timing or dosage, polluting surface and ground water. • About 67 million pounds of syntnetic pesticides are used on lawns each yeac representing about 5700mnLon. • Of the 36 most commonly used lawn pesticides. 14 are probable of possible carcinogens. 15 are tinlked to bmh defects. 21 to reproductive effects 24 to neurotoxicity. Z2 to liver or kidney damage, and 34 are sensitizers and/or initanu. Sources: Beyond Pesticides, US EPA 1 Solar Powered Motor A photovoltaic operated pump mixes fresh guano and water. 2 Shrouded Water Tank Keeps bats cooL 100% Natural Organic Guano-Gro Nitrogen %839 Phosphorus %2.15 Potasshim %1.73 CaJdum %359 Magnesium %0.45 Sodium PPM 3382 Zinc PPM 555 Iron PPM 745 Texas A&M Solar Decathlon solar.tamu.edu Sulphur Nitrates PPM 1466 %Less than 01)1

Page 279

nMarketing the groBuildingSystem •Economic theory missed the most thrilling opportunity to change the fate of the world by completely Ignoring the number and power of people who are more interested in social gains than personal financial gains, and those passionately interested in making the world a better place to live In, rather than remaining narrowly focused on their own personal benefit’ Muhammed Yunus. 2006 Nobe) Peace Prize Winner The ToHome responds to an evidence based home ecorcma, according to the breakdown of awoge axt-per-month for a typkal centoiTeQs tenfy. A Neorchy becorres erident when otgarued xrordrg to finmoil burden She!tn Tranportation. Food Energy, and Health. Because erf the revcArtionary concept behind its binding system there n an inrvn&able amount of appGeztons for the goHorne. As archnets. desigren. and engreen our response to the movements of ow global community is through Sust&nabZty, Disaster Refef. Do It Youneg Open Source Systems and Technologiol Growth. We have efogned a budding system that consklen the irnpJCTs of the desgn. manubetunn^ construction, and life of our building on the earth. The groHome Introduces a new economic model into the home industry, avowing homeowners to rKremetnaty grow, take out smaller loans,and thus, al but etrnhae the costs of debt The groHome requires no heavy equipment to construct, and cm be constructed from muhipte locations at once, invohring designers from around the world. Although we have incorpoCTed todayY newest tedwtobgrs, the groHome wO never decay - it embodies evolution. Yearly Costs to Family 14,000 10,000 12,000 4,000 8,000 6,000 2,000 0 Pay-As-You-Grow Design Cost Comparison Financial Stabile Doen Source System Texas A&M Solar Decathlon solar.tamu.edu ft iff Pay-As-You-Grow: Because you only purchase what you can affonl. adding more componeits as you need, there is no need for a large mortgage reducing the amount of money paki for the groHome. The amount of equity on this eompte of efaasw relief for post-Hurricane Katma hotting In Mississippi only Increases after the initial purchase and constnictlon of the groHome. As the number of occupants grow^ so does the amount of space in the house.

Page 286

2008 LOCATION: unbuilt FUNDING: The Kendeda Fund PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III (lead designer); Sam Brunswick; Charlie Candler; Youngjae Chung; Cassidy Ellis; Ariel Fisk-Vittori; Janis Fowler; Lovleen Gill-Aulakh; Kate Goldstein; Sebastijian Jemec; Lauren Jones; Jesse Miller; Randall Notgrass; Aaron Smith; Brady Zaitoon The Buckminster Fuller Challenge (2008) The Galveston project explores the conversion of oil rigs to repair coastal regions in two phases. ProtoOne establishes community support with a sophisticated housing system utilizing hurricane waste. ProtoTwo, a parallel protoCooperative initiative, uses a mineral extraction process to transform the oil and water-purification industries through the use of waste brine as a mineral source for a wide variety of uses. Carbon balancing of materials results in the extraction of magnesium oxide (MgO), which is transformed into an elegant, cementatious building system by reparatively closing loops in a flexible eco-industrial process that creates jobs. The first phase includes re-assessing community resources for reparative housing and protoTyping in neutral space (NGO partnering with universities) that provides freedom from policies, codes, etc., linkage to global information-flow, and open access. The second phase, protoOne, includes community protoTyping, implementation of reparative systemically adaptive housing, and proposals to build the neighborhood. The third phase, protoTwo, integrates housing technologies with coastal regenerative systems and harvesting MgO from regional sources (oil rig brine pools, salt mines, reverse-osmosis seawater desalination, accretion from seawater, water treatment plants). This system replaces woodchip monocoque core with MgO foams and sulphur cement with MgO shell fiber cement. GALVESTON REDEVELOPMENT

Page 288

neighborhood ecology urban ecology SOURCE RE-SOURCE SOURCE RE-SOURCE TO Window Sill Greenhouse Greenhouse Roof Window Sill Greenhouse Greenhouse Roof Greenhouse ShrubsGreenhouse ShrubsFat WallFat Wall GardenGarden Solar Still PondRoofTube Treatment Solar Still Roof Greenhouse Module MegaGora Plantation Greenhouse Module MegaGora Plantation Waste Water Bathroom Kitchen waste water Waste Water Raised Bed Fat Wall Fat Wall FatWall Greenhouse Waste Water Reed Pond Wastewater Reed Wetland Osmosis Plant Treatment Pond Treatment Aquaponlc Greenhouse Hydroponic FatWall Roof Greenhouse Composting Vermlculture Kitchen Composting Raised Bed Raised Bed Fat Wall Fat Wall Greenhouse Raised Bed Garden Aquaponlcs Hydroponics Vertical Composter Window SIII Garden m Z rn O m to

Solar Hot PVs Water ; Brine collection j Roof Passive Cooling Tube Greenhouse Heating Roof Bamboo Wastewater Design for Disassembly Treatment DfD Building system solution sets cooping Shaded Deck —e| Reusable Parts of DfD Building system Windrow Compost Solar Electricity Solar Hot Water Re-radiation Biochar ice Battery W Packer 2000 Ri-—a ______SulfurSUdk - Osmosis… Wane Tire Proto-1 DFD Proto-2 DFD O O O m ho I m SULPHUR PAVING INDUSTRY RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEM SOLAR ENERGY/ SHADE SYSTEM aftfth&^&T’^^iJm^^CT— tati^ia RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTHISTORIC DISTRICTNON-HISTORIC / INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ram E3 @ EXISTING BUILDINGS SUPERSTRUCTURE STRUCTURE PROPOSED BUILDINGS tot TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Page 289

NON-HISTORIC / INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Solar Water Desalinization Basalt Fiber Factory Solid Basalt Reinforced Heavy Duty Space Frame En(rgy Gas ifier fer c< RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Wind Turbines CT Public transport system Hollow monocoque Space Frame Sea Wall Hollow monocoque Fiber reinforced Mgo Columns Basalt membranes z^ wind/ precipitation protection Q gggl^fflWisi HISTORIC DISTRICT WindJurbines Discs Basalt Heavy Duty Membranes Solar Powered Ice Battery Combination of Hollow & Solid Fiber Reinforced Mgo Columns O-D Residential Units

Page 290

sample block: MgO cement manufacturer full community Inculdes: • aslan fish farms

• biochar stove manufacturers
• community gardens
• glass bottle recycling facilities
• living machine production centers
• HgO cement manufacturers • produced water and brine facilities
• solar drier producers
• wastewater-treating living machines • residential neighborhoods EcoBalance diagram of full community energy materi al air water food 30 GLASS BOTTLE MANUFACTURING AND RECYCLING SOLAR DRYER PRODUCED WATER BRINE SEAFRONT Graffs K INDUSTRIAL HISTORIC- RESIDENTIALCOMMERCIAL

Page 291

URBAN ECOLOGY AIR / WATER vertical water treatment AIR / FOOD vertical food production PROCESSING HEAT multi-use vertical dryer ORGANIC SOLID WASTE high-rate separation & organic fertilizer NEIGHBORHOOD ECOLOGY community gardens @6) produced water brine production living machines production and sales mixer and bagger oftIcc and sales waler storage, conveyor work surfjcc glass bottle manufacturing wastewater-treatIng living machines

Page 292

5z ilo > Ui » >1 a O Z UJ 111 a: O Z O rottsrcr urn AND KFUbl9§iR> >rrktAr<™unA’oiumx 5H4KMU/\R¥ MAINLAND AOlVlC KLCTCAJKXIN AnTOWJC AKIYAS MJlADU nxN1OOCXXUXAILA AW V^OC UDUUIid I NTtXSZArcA FUhTCrCg CAI3Od StaftSTWCA,Drt^ELA,tt>FmtfflY> AamumcNTM^ZDABaiGaM) use cr msw:tcAmGMDcootMistootos U5tCTsaMt,umAM>TCOtrtrcr JJWL’DXwnCj TCATTSUTOKOTTO PROTIC JFIAKD XMUOXWULNI |W Ul1u:AUUML KIXXLAJMd VWW RtSnXADON BAY Noruju 3^&*ii PROTOCODE [I El R @ AIGa888I I pRotoz l] MAINLAND: WETLAND: Biochar megaflora plantation Multi use brine processing -Megaflora Increase food production due to micronutrient / compost biochar mix Large scale remineralization of soil using processed sea brine Reduced Extraction Increase carbon sink due to heavy forest NUIA»U. BK£AOC4 ORBOWNC NTUISIfrUb LAi RtSTOWKN Muia»H,c ytAOClG, XOIWOL NTUSIHANTC USTORAnON vura»u; 3KLAOC4 OKBUIDNC NTIKSt HAfy iAi RTSTORKnai BARRIER ISLAND: High strength monocoque building system manufacturing Carbon Sink Food Chain to Sea Aquatic species diversity improvement Diverse habitat MgO cement foam with High wind tension consi Mimics float/swim adap Wind Powered Infrustru Obtained from local sou Renewably purified Reduced smog due to

Page 293

MAINLAND ASSESSMENT: WETLAND ASSESSMENT: BARRIER ISLAND ASSESSMENT. COASTUNE ASSESSMENT: OFFSHORE ASSESSMENT. |M- Building & Infrastructure take off M- Construction Material Waste distruction M~ Urban Detmv Tires. ravOTW-tCars Trucks ronjmKtcn. Ataenal Sboruge M Dockdovud^-t vZZZ^Krt—H: X..„-’^ | E- Electric/Telecom pole repair & Increased Erosion E-Infastructwa d^rupircn € P^pelrctrolJOT E Od 9CJ—^—tote. F- Farmland destruction/ soil contamination F-Wetland plants uprooted, wildlife disrupted F- Infrastructure disruption F- Reef Jestruclion F- Loss of Bcdarcity | W-Water Quality & Brackinsh water contamination W-Wetlands Distroyed W-Water contarcrubcn W~Watec/wastewater papef ne breakage W- Decreased Watrf CNu^’_ । A.Reforestation Needs A- Carbon sink distruptlon A- Loss of vegetation A Increased Climate Change A- Increased CJuna* Chrnge 1 | 5ARRIER|I5LAND JL- __ L OCEAN। LtrtURSII । 1 । 1 i 1 |SltMlOWLWGH| ।I HITIAOS 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I sttoowrux I I I I I I । TROJOI। I I I I rawD-tut। 5001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OOM। COULOtf lOC ।I ।I ।I । I ।I । I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 L I 1 1 1 ।I I I jj 1 1 7 I . |. 1 1 I I 1 I | I 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 lOmCRKRTAnON TEKnON । 1 1 |Noroiru I ik)n\ssia,B£uooj*I । ORNairas 1 1 pouseitANw। |ttSTORAnON| 1 1 NO 1X560,BUAOCA OR NIIDNG NTOSCtlWW RtSTOTAnON 1 1 1 1 1 sunAMI rOR LAITtD CUUXIG AKD RUJtAjiCN 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1X590,BttOCA orbuldm; I I UMIUL ImjtmcNI 1500X715X51 I I I I NomsgoMtocc, OR&JlDMjI Buocojt rcuira ontol arerr rcuxmoioxtkol ATfiOTWtrOR NTOOKtOTAnCN NO NTOO DO 05ttAR 51OTUtOX TO XA Tunu: MttrecacuDS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 rcuuncMCONTtos AaxoKittatroiNArrCTim AJtAS I. Hwwttsrcwoi1 NTTMLGTCKOTX or C>TCAlt rcuunchOTCLs

• 5ALINITY|। 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 COASTLINE: OFFSHORE: fFnonocoque prefab ^ruction kratinn rrectatinn CTrurtunprahle CTrurtHre Transform oil rig technologies to wind/wave/geothermal Remineralize coastal areas 7 ^ure Renewable based infrastructure Oil industry components (oil rig) retro-taed for renewable energy production: Wind. Wave. Hvdroaen. Geothermal [tees Dune Stabilization with biochar and micro nutrient organic furtilizer Revitilized ocean habitat Reverse osmosis / and solar desalination of sea water to make brine Biochar/ash production to neutralize acidification of return water to seas Mineral and biodiversity balance improvement and carbon sink L: imewable energy Renewable based infrastructure with bird-friendly wind turbines Decreased C02 saturation

Page 294

Phosphate Source: wastewater treatment MgO Source: processing oil refinery by-product Renewable Fuel Base Components: poured sprayed molded RECYCLING GRINDER TRUCK coNsmucnoNsoE OEIIRIS INN WALL PULVERIZED MATERIALS READY FOR RECYCLING NAILS READY FOR RECYCLING REFINERIES, OIL PLATFORMS, AND PIPELINES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO PRODUCED WATER FACILITIES IN TEXAS 211 billion gallons of produced water per year DESALINATION PLANTS IN TEXAS 48 billion gallons of water are desalinated per year | MOOD platfom |^14000 miles of pipeline !=530 Billion barrels oll/yr BUILDING SYSTEM MATRIX total d±olvcd iclkh <l0000ppm Wal&3=>redlQ-Oa>SCLOOO loiot d=flved socti >SOroO deiolinol^^n detign capocily |MGD| O 0QZ,CU5 O OOf-OS O 0^1 o 1-3 O 3^ O MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS Q. 0. 0. O’ 0. 0. 0.^----------- G—-------- O—---- O— O—- 0— 0----- A O o ’ 0 f 0 rf O e> e MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS BUILDING TYPOLOGY BASIC BUSINESS TYPES< NO. OF R TORIES
ELATIVER NEIGHT ELATIVE E COST MBODIEO ENERGY4 AVAIL­ ABILITY PROTOCODE SAO BUILDING DETAIL MATERIAL BASE TRADITIONAL USE 6. TIMBER FRAME LADDER BLOCKr^ |raiii!^lg niH 0X-.------- O--------- e---------- Qc^---- iH |iH ITITII 1 — 1111111 f 0 — e C O _________ 7. SOLID CONCRETE LADDS?BLOCK n.$ RAnr
’I I H I I Qr----— 9—--------- Ok----------- LLLU-U I I I1I 1I i i1i i।i 1 1 1I 1I 1 6 I n O & © - rfO O & FOAM LADDER BUDCKSYSTIM :?nD inn H IM I o——. — O——~ o------------ I I I , 1111111 1111111 p O 0 _ 1 At 1 I I 9. I GRANCRETE& RECYCLED POLY5TYRJNE t rn • l.nfr l i l l o—------ o----- O-------— 11111:1 II … 1 I । 1111111 LJ 1IIII C0 — 0 e O f^ —— --------- 10. MG0 CEMENT& MGO FOAIA t o—------ 0■»I .?»» 0-—----
e---------- ITITI I I -— I I I II1.1 1111i11 11111 :o _________ Y0_—_____ MgO Manufacturing MgO cement is made from by-products of other industries, mainly oil, desalination and wastewater treatment.

Page 295

INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY protoTWoprotoOne CRUSHWCYCIONE StPERATOn TRUCK protoTwoprotoOne L t^ ‘^f S’ S’s’ S” »<^^ X:&V^ ^^ ^^^

Page 296

GABLE ROOF PYRAMID ROOF GABLE ROOF SOLAR PVS PYRAMID ROOF GREENHOUSE GABLE ROOF GREENHOUSE PYRAMID ROOF COLORED PVS FLAT ROOF WATER BAG INSULATION PYRAMID ROOF WIND TURBINES PYRAMID ROOF SOLAR PVS profoOne ProtoOne is the near-term improvement of a place in bio/physio/socio terms that uses the variety of interventions offered by the ecoBalance approach to planning and design. It consists of a modular building system based on a ladder block structure and plug-in wall and roof system to allow for mass customization.

Page 297

NOW HOUSE retrofitting / storm-proofing an existing home existing house: framed reinforced house: monocoque 1 removal of existing siding and insulation 2 installation of helical anchors (optional lifting onto piers if needed) 3 wrap house in wire mesh 4 spray aerated concrete through mesh between studs 5 install window, door, and vent masking 6 spray MgO cement directly onto mesh 7 finish cement shell or reinstall siding if needed NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION traditional architectural elements incorporated into the protoOne building system nW 11 E 3 STAGE 1 STAGE 2 FOOD CUCnVAnON WASTEWATER WETLAND STAGES ladder block system

Page 298

FOURTH FLOOR so 66 60 60 00 THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR protoTwo ProtoTwo represents new levels of maximizing potential which are not necessarily limited to so-called advanced technological issues. The building system, which can be used with protoOne, is an MgO cement and aerated concrete-based monocque modular structure that can be mass customized with wall, roof, and other inserts.

Page 299

module with fatwalls fatwalls moved to interior JOINT (4) COLUMN (4) BEAM (8) FATWALL (4) packed module modified structure packing of fatwalls into module arrival of additional modules removal of modules from truck growing of existing structure

Page 302

2009 LOCATION: unbuilt CLIENT: Laura Cisneros, CEO Tonic, LLP FUNDING: donated services PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III (designer); Sam Brunswick; Charlie Candler; Sebastijian Jemec; Lauren Jones; Jesse Miller; Gail Vittori Conceived in 2009 with Tonics CEO Laura Cisneros, the EcoSports Complex creates in design a place of balance between the natural and built environments: striving for carbon, water, and air balance. In practice, balance represents a unifying continuum, carrying forward through construction and operations, with a visible metric to gauge performance. In function, the EcoSports Complex is a flexible open building system providing a diverse array of fitness opportunities for all ages and abilities. The scalable facility leverages and utilizes the natural aesthetics and terrain to engage and encourage an individual’s relationship with the natural environment while providing all the services of a conventional health club - strength, flexibility, and cardiovascular training. The regionalized building system relies on a diverse and healthy materials palette derived from the 15 Level 1 ecoregions in the U.S., taking advantage of eradicated invasive species and FSC-certified woods to fulfill timber resource needs, and a range of non­ toxic, non-emitting low embodied energy interior and exterior materials to ensure healthful air quality. ECOSPORTS COMPLEX™

Page 304

C->CD black water treatment tree planters grey water treatment community garden planters — gravity fed ,potential power generation source QO t / _- pumped showers greywater treating community edible garden planters Blackwater treating tree planters WATER FILING SEQUENCE: it rains 2. rainwater fills up the shower cisterns 4. as the low, main cistern fills, water is pumped to the high cistem by muscle power 5. as the higher main cistern is filled, it recirculates water back to the lower cisterns and generates energy through generator/motors high main -idem low nrotn cistern 3. as the shower cisterns fill, water is pumped to the high and low main cisterns by electricity generated by solar pv panels

Page 305

IHEES -OVOOck 4000 sqft roof 20000 sqft track 51000 sqft nelqhboi WATER COLLECTION & FILTRATION MAJOR WATER USAGE UU rREES:18 large liediurn’snal1 :ontainer trees ?/rnntainor COMMUNITY GARDENS 2community garden —indi^yidua] _ plots trees tn container trees 1n container with garden storage GYM EACH ITIESB B 0’ TREES IN CONTAINERS’ PV CELLS & SOLAR HEATING trees In container with art/speach wall zoom track power towers gym gardens: 1800 sqft 3000 sqft garden supply storage raffiti wallcP O power towers ’/ track O (9 o O ®\° 1B^ individual garden plots: 30xl00sqft ______________________gym: 4000sqft,2400 sqft open container trees: 42 megaflora 120’ S0U\R CHART north WINO ROSE |40° 7^ wind speed (trots) I I 1’20

Page 306

Q bamboo [b] vines for shading [^rapidly renewable trees (such as paulownia elongata) [^FSC certified Invasive species MATERIAL material harvesting^] dry1ng[f] material sorting and preparat1on[^ jeam. column, and joint manufacturing^ food cleaning and preparation [gJ ventilation system 1n the structure [7] power towers to store water [8] 0 Q W”o W 0 \
W0 nt- // O IZ O J tl] vertical garden other plant material sources [3] biofuel production megaflora community garden [n] material recycling waste materials as biofuel [^compost as fertilizer tqjbuilding reconfiguration [rjstructural armature adaptatl [^ excess heat redirected Into F^grey watered landscape B^ biosolids produced, used n^black water used as tree n^blochar produced biofuel supply Increased
contribution to organic compostQ buildingstructure (columns, beams, jo1nts)[g building system expansion [j] exercise armature creation [ml source resource n> C 0 use water,material (Drainwater collection from roof and track (Drainwater storage (Drainwater use — -.©hot water/shower ©greywater storage (Dgreywater use ©blackwater storage —„@dir filtration ©blackwater filtration -“©lumber trees-------“©building material ©greywater filtration ---------©garden------------------©food source energy,air ©solar radiation ©air ©photovoltaics .-©wind turbine ©louvres @ air filtration: ©solar hot water landscape & green wall ©solar air heati ng ---77/---------—-© air circulation & exhaust ©electrical: fans,pumps,1ights,computers .appliances © hot shower/water

Page 307

Embodied Carbon Balance (IbsC) Water Balance (gal/yr) 15,000 -10.000 10.000 5.000 5.000 ■Emitted from production of 140 steel assembly joints Stored by 5740 board ft of slash pine lumber nTotal 11.979 4.496 ‘.483 Energy Balance (kwH/yr) Fact 1Ity Demand Generated from $250,000 of pv panels iTotal -13-^96. -117.227 ^03.631 40,000 20,000 0 -20.000 -40,000 -60,000 -80.000 -100.000 -120.000 -140.000 Food Balance(gal H20/yr) -22X233- garden area to feed 70 people Produced from greywaler system 204.750 250.000 200.000 150.000 100.000 50.000 -50.000 -100.000 -150.000 -200.000 -‘^.n nnn (megaflora)- SOURCE PROCESS USE RESOURCE food gardens)- waste water gardens)-’ “ventilation systen^i in the structure/ /ventilation through’ Qsite and space , human respiration human exhale used by flora) ..Q. ^auna respiration ) (increases C02 contenyi f’air-cooling of systems’ o increased temperature> reci rculation of ai^ A Cheated air as condul^ ’-” (for energy transfer/ other plant material sources)’ (rainwater). (filtration) —‘/filtered non-potabl^,_. ’ ^water for bathing / ^‘municipal water system). rt /fonditioning ) U^heating/cooling)/ 1 ,/potable water for), bw, (puman consumption/ — ,^rey water supplied M Landscape , ^/black water usedt transportation)’ (used in sanitary systems)- — Slater within system used’ tatfor cooling capacity , 1 /water stored in power towers’ ,-0 tfor its potential energy^ (community garden).. ‘fruit & nut pickir^ (vegetable gatherlrn /food cleaning’ \pnd preparation. (transportation)- (on-site consumption- (juice bar)-. rf’ /productive leisure and) <>(Community engagement (off-site consumption 1 /gardens contribute’ <to carbon sink :: <-‘/biosolids produced and’ »t- wsed for fertilizer (food flora treats waste) /plant seeds saved and dissemenated for futurt (food development, ‘solar air collector). ‘photovol tales)- (wind turbines)-’ (biofuel production)- 1 thechanical energy) ^qn human exercise)” /water power from) … ^jower towers/ (the municipal power grid) (bamboo) beat transferrancej (^vertical socks) > (electricity production)’^: (biofuel harvesting-. /water elevation for}.,, (Storage of energy / ”’-…,, ,/conversion between forms of energy: potential, mechanical chemical, electrical (ac/dc). (thermal , radiant , (material harvesting, (water heated)— mechanical systems powered)” r’/electrical system supportii te= computers etc, is supplied (artificial lighting created)’ biofuel consumed). /gravity-generated wate) pressure utilized / (biofuel supply increased). (excess heat redirected) (into productive action) rf^ bight lights attract Insect) c establishing food supply (for bat population J (biochar produced) A zw^ter pumped back int) \power towers ,’ ,(waste materials’

” ‘consumed as biofuel, (vines for shading)-’ (drying contribution to organic compost). /rapidly renewable trees , Jsuch as paulownia elongata)) ,lnaterial sorting) (^nd preparation ) ‘building structure .(columns, beams, j< flora fertilization ^ 3^1th compost/ fSC certified invasive species)’ /6eam. column, and ^manufacturing building system expansion)- material recycling) building reconfiguration) fexercise armature creation>- Structural armature ’\ adaptation to new uses’

Page 308

LIFECYCLE BALANCING resource cycle stage efficiency indices AIR WATER FOOD ENERGY MATERIAL (D O O (D @ (D@ SOURCE^© Qra^EQ PROCESS ^ ^ @^ (3) ® ® 0) (D G) (5) 0 .resource type megaflora vertical garden community garden solar radiation fresh air rainwater bamboo wind energy material recycling building reconfiguration excess heat grey water utilities black water fertilizer air recirculation biosolids for fertilizer personal water efficiency ratings comparison percent source on-site off-site process continued lost use source on-site off-site process continued lost use productive waste resource reuse 50% 50: 81% 19% 711 10% 39% SOURCE RE-SOURCF group II group I use source capacity 6*1 2 tiatterte: 3’1 use 1 CdtUU 3 rvehsyster: 4 citrate cortr: resource process 1 eleciricii group energy cycle elaboration and comparison percert 2 lignt h., 3 cech. syste,: 4 cUcale control resource1 beat 2 titterles vegetable gathering ventilation electricity production filtration Fruit picking material harvesting artificial lighting computers building additions air breathed potable water mechanical systems sanitary water exercise armatures -food consumption comparison of present against historical averages user KEY network optimum -facility optimum user equi1ibriurn 49: 81 521 481 141 211 471 lei 3?t 91 2012 SOURCE 2009 SOURCE 2 energy 4. 3 landscape G 4 arcatures 7. 5 buildingI. rescu-ce 1 bic,:l<o: 2 plant ccep: process 1 compost 2 biofuel 3 poles 4 beams 5 boards source 1 biofuel 2 bamboo 3 cegaflur resource 1 new growth 3.? 2 landscape 8.5 3 deconstr. 6.9 4 reconfl,. 4.8 source 1 fruits 2 vegotabli 3 Other dr types:

• Sufficient 02. nealthy CO? level, minimal pollutants
• deficient 02. unhealthy C02 level, excessive pollutants city-based facility groups air cycle rating world community of facilities material cycle development use 1 eaten on-site 38% 2 taken off stie 17% 3 rrpUntir, tank 31t

Page 309

-quj1tty wasLewater temDerature wind energy waste water use solar thermal -tags indviduaT usage _rfid ureters specific flows and usage and cor -sends personal usage info for specific realtime sensing lity weather materials production food -production Check status onii -track info online -remote access -realtime feedback comDines data for building and individual -creates graphic interface/display -calculates usage, analyzes ecobaiance -realtime monitoring and feedback and alerts -sends individual’s information: -heart rate -calories -exercise info -person metatag _rfid: -sends use info -recieves/displays ecobaiance data -realtime monitoring and feedback LIFE CYCLE MONITORING SYSTEM Erf LIFE CYCLE MONITORING USING QR CODES

Page 310

The Island Nations Initiative is not unlike our other work in Nicaragua, Grenada, and other locations in central America during the 1980’s. All these represented not only a need but a responsibility to spend concerted time creating programs for populations at risk, either due to political upheavals or nature’s wrath. Each was different but shared patterns in how one works in regions whose natural and human resources are instrumental parts of any well-informed intervention. As our friend Jody Naderi points out, one must not think in a disaster mentality (a disconnect with the stars) but rather in pro-aster terms (reconnecting with the stars). To make sure we reconnect to the place, we mapped all the natural resources of the country including ecological repairs, potential life support attributes (such as soil, good breezes, rainfall, etc), and hazards (flood, landslide, and earthquake prone areas), and developed five scenarios for redevelopment. We mapped human resources for each life support area which included taking an inventory of traditional housing forms, as well as the placement of agriculture, cement and brick kilns, aggregate businesses, ports of entry, etc. From this, the lack of certain resources, both human and natural, became evident. We then developed an approach that could intervene immediately by coordinating out of country material donations which could eventually be re-established as local manufactured items. This was done in a manner in which every step becomes a positive advancement forward (solid, thin panel-based wheeled carts made from flat-pack delivered panels became solid tents that, in turn, become roofs by folding the tent). Porches are provided that serve spatial and community functions and also can fold down to protect from hurricanes, looting and the like. The building system becomes a provider of all basic life support needs through the use of scored panels which can become furniture, ladders, solar cookers, wastewater wetland tanks, and much more. Finally, all parts are codified in a OR code so that cell phones can be used to get instructions from the part itself. Text messaging allows for crowd-sourcing (person-to-person and person-to-community) which provides community directed teaching and corrections. 2010 LOCATION: prototype in Austin FUNDING: The Kendeda Fund; self-funded PROJECT TEAM: Pliny Fisk III (designer); Adam Pyrek (architect of record); Ramon Carrasquillo (structural engineer); Margaret Chandler; Aaron Cloninger; Bess Hester; Nick Hester; Lauren Jones; Jesse Miller; Randall Notgrass; Johnathon Perisho; Melissa Pineda GroForms: A Home Building Kit for Island Nations (2010) The Island Nations Initiative is a housing system that functions as a home-building kit that unskilled labor can construct, yet it withstands hurricane and earthquake conditions due to the carefully predesigned and pre-engineered components. The GroForm Building Kit can serve both humanitarian needs and the ecotourism industry with the potential for the later to aid in partially supporting the former if relief agencies are not available or unable to function. Our approach is one of a basic armature framework that is ultra-strong so that it can withstand 175 mph winds and Level 4 earthquakes. The system contains several options to evolve the building according to user needs. This includes room additions, porches that swing closed during a hurricane, and window, door, and wall options that encourage local manufacturing. A nation-wide suitability analysis has been undertaken so that the building kit is placed in areas that are not prone to further disaster. Four scenarios resulted from this analysis. The GroForm Kit both serves immediate needs as a hard-panel tent and then evolves into a roof and subsequently a home. Every effort is made for each stage to function well spatially with privacy possible even at the tent stage through the use of the structural support members as shelves, partitions, and other storage devices. The advantage of groForms is that each stage serves as part of the next, starting from the foundation that keeps the family off the ground to this same foundation becoming the basis of the family home. Aesthetically, the building looks traditional with no stigma that it is disaster relief housing that most tents so often take on. In this manner, we believe we are really building the spirit of community from the start. The GroForm Kit, in its most advanced level, helps create the means for true self-reliance, both economically through the support and development of local skills and by the balancing of resource needs on a daily basis at the home and community scale. The water cycle is complete from harvesting to waste water; the food cycle from establishing gardens to resourcing the waste after it is eaten and prepared; the material cycle from establishing tree plantations to configuring a building for change, disassembly, and barter. All aspects of the building kit are tailored to use local labor including the possibility of pop-out furniture (pre­ scored panels from the same plywood members used in the building). Solar water purification, solar cookers, solar dryers, and seed starters can become part of the building system (other options include a composting toilet, a small solar-electric system with LED lights and charger for emergency use, cell phones, or radios). ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE: HAITI

Page 312

A 1 D E F G H 2 B C Zf-yOT---” ^’^^~ J K M N Lfin Dcjc3[^OunL-i O P ffr@@^^,^^p^h; :]^^;^4^pEi3::^^ 4 5 F|^^r^ 6 7 8 mnr?” on LJI - pry L OLI — N.3,4.3 Papua new /GUINEA M.4,4.4 ^TIMOR LESTE ^4,3.3 .CUBA E.3,3.4 [ANTIGUA + |BARBUDA IpALAU BarbadosIE BAHAMAS ”0”| In.4,4.3 ।SOLOMON ISLANDS NAURU [HAITI

Page 313

b.4,3.3 E.1,3.2 IPHE BAHAMASCUBA ^.1,3.3 ‘HAITI IE.3,3.4 ‘ANTIGUA+ IBARBUDA E.3,3.4 BARBADOS ‘N.I,4.2 IPALAU M.4,4.4 TIMOR LESTE N.3,4.3 Vapua new (GUINEA N.4,4.3 0.1,4.2 ^SOLOMON ISLANDS hlAURU TIMOR LESTEIMb BAHAMAS ~<i.CTtD COUNTRY AACA 10OT6 JARBADOS PAPAU NEW GUINEA SOi OILMAN 1’1 AND’ EXPOSURE: NONE VERY HIGH — hi 4 h +M LLLJ-o-LLJJ_ _ L-11 Lrf] 1 IJ L r-rTTo-rn-i | 1 IcUBA ArfccTro couNTnY AncA ,c TRQPrtAL STORM WINTER STORM LAJITHQUAMI ‘HAITI [ANTIGUA + BARBUDA

Page 314

RAINFALL LANDSLIDE PORTS TOPOGRAPHY WAVESWATERWAYS URBAN WINDSURGE SLOPES POPULATION FLOODSTORM SOILDISPLACEMENT DROUGHT CLIMATEEARTHQUAKE ROADS

Page 315

Reparative Scenario highlights potentially suitable areas for self-sufficient communities based on damaged or otherwise potentially not suitable land to be repaired. The highlighted areas are 100 square mile quadrants of Haiti that seem to be located near poorly productive soil and may be prone to landslides. Urban Relief Scenario highlights potentially suitable areas for self-sufficient communities based on adjacency to urban areas and location of displaced persons. The highlighted areas are 100 square mile quadrants of Haiti that seem to be located near urban infrastructure and harbors to deliver materials and be placed on or near more productive soils. Disaster Avoidance Scenario highlights potentially suitable areas for self- sufficient communities based on minimal impact from natural forces. The highlighted areas are 100 square mile quadrants of Haiti that seem to not be hindered by some of the mapped hazards such as earthquake propensity, surge height, landslide, etc. Harbor Scenario highlights potentially suitable areas for self-sufficient communities based on adjacency to harbors and infrastructure. The highlighted areas are 100 square mile quadrants of Haiti that seem to not be hindered by some of the mapped hazards and correlate well with existing, as well as essential, infrastructure li.e. roads, ports, and urban areas).

Page 316

NO FLOODING FLOODING WINDS HUMIDn-Yj HAITI SUrTABlLITY SCENARIOS j Harbor . Disaster Avoidance . Urban Reiief . Reparative 0 E C 5,760 4 E 40,320 28 B 2,160 D 17,280 12 3 A LAND REQUIREMENTS (sq ft) 1,440 INDIVIDUALS (# of people) 1 COMMUNFTY (# of families) 1

Page 317

BASIC CYCLE SOURCE contribute Ventilation Human and fauna respiration” Increases C02 content USE’ AIR EVENT CYCLE SOURCE Rainwater Harvesting natural fibers L gardens/ Greywater supplies ’, container gardens and solar sprouter IBlackwater/ Water stored
/ Ecosystem regeneration %, later for livestock consumption’ Water for bathing LPotable water for humar^d ^^^cConsumptior^^^^r Purifying - ,UV water purifier WATER WWvreUnd.coo»rf land ind wuduret output to air cycle LIFE CYCLE BALANCING FOOTPRINTS AIR WATER FOOD 4a)b) SOURCE Lontamer qaraer sow snroutei 3ioPod Todet ’. composunc ‘lant seeds wed anA riarvesrinc 1<<<omn>t1Inrhmirt uean^no ancood ceveToomen Dreoaranor jraamc waste !Arita OrtilryA -onsumnuor FOOD SOURCE Drying Biochar produced 1 Organic waste 1 composted or 1 biocharred for, A fertilizer/ ^^“^Photovoltaics Solar cooler and drier Brochar stove \ Natural by products ‘Burning for b!ocP Electnoty product ENERGY SOURCE Organs waste Lb:oJwred far ^ fertiErer/ Nirural fibOTS Urol, pa-ms. ve^verl Seep and recycled wood (plywood) /^ Weaving Xq Budding system’ expansion Budding configuration PROCESS MATERIALS eCTu heet rodrectod bto pTCucCw oe A ENERGY MATERIALS Quinos’ j <4 = L’ / m°1 AIR 1 Ecological Footprint Required for Oxygen Production: 20 trees or 20,000 sq ft Ecological Footprint Required for Carbon Dioxide Fixation: 1,720 sq ft of active leaf surface WATER 1 Household Water Use / Water consumption per day tor 4 people: 80 gallons (18,480 cubic in) One cistern (8x8x78 inches: 4,260 cubic in) /person/day “Additional community dry season wafer tank reserve necessary 2 Wastewater Treatment (240 sq ft) 80 gallons per day (4 people)/ 1 sq foot per gallon per day / 2-3 days mln for water to stay FOOD Self-sufficient food production 1 Raised bed vegetable garden / 0.042 acres (260,940 sq in) 2 Raised bed grain garden / 0.025 acres (156,816 sq in) 3 Frolf, tree and nut garden / 0.034 acres (209.504 sq in) 4 Self-reliance food production: a) meats, milk and eggs / 0.037 acres (230,000 sq In) *4 person minimum required: 0.4 acre b) Chickens, goat and pig ENERGY 1 Solar Systems (Solar Cooker/ Drier/ Sprouter / UV Purifier-Stlller / PV’s) 2 BloChar Stove MATERIALS 1 Building system 2 Raised bed gardens 3 Solar systems (Solar Cooker / Drier / Stiller / Sprouter / UV Purifier) 4 Water cisterns

Page 318

TENT ROOF RAISING COLUMN REMOVABLE PLATE TO CONVERT TENT TYPE ROOF TO HOME ROOF ROOF DRAIN HOLES TO GUTTER POTENTIAL CLOSED COLUMN AS CISTERN TYPICAL FURNrrURE CUTOUT/ POPOUT SCREENED PANEL TYPICAL FOLDED COLUMN & SPACE FOR GUTTER DOWNSPOUT OR CONCRETE COLUMN TRIANGULAR ROOF STIFFENER/ CONNECTOR/STORAGE AREA SOLAR STILL, COOKER, DRIER OR P.V. MODULE CLOSET OR BATHROOM STALL TYPICAL WALL/SCREEN WITH POPOUT FURNFTURE HIDDEN TWO WAY STRAPPING SYSTEM FOR HIGH WINDS (STEEL, NYLON OR HEMP) STILTS HAITI PUERTO RICO TRINIDAD DOMINICA BARBADOS

Page 319

Piece Name floor panel A floor panel B floor panel C column beam A beam B beam C beam D roof panel A roof panel B roof panel C roof panel D triangle sides triangle ends InflII panel A Infill panel B 22 37 52 16 16 32 32 12 24 24 No. In 12’ Module No. In 16’ Module No. In B’ Module 1500 people housed In 1,000 modules 21,556 36,500 52,444 $1,347.22 $2,281.25 $3,277.78 5250 people housed | 1000 people housed In 3,000 modules | In 1,000 modules BEDROOM LIVING ROOM | 6500 people housed| | In 3,000 modules | 0 B’module 2000 people housed In 1.000 modules O 16* module 3000 people housed In 1,000 modules 0 two 12’ modules 1750 people housed In 1,000 modules 2500 people housed In 1,000 modules OUTDOOR KITCHEN BATHROOMS

Page 320

Screened Grower Solar Still Solar Cooker plastic bags wet paper towels folded Infrastructure folded Infrastructure slick, self-made plastic cloth black surface water white surface cooking box reflective surface access door folded Infrastructure coconut coir tevlar reflective surface perforated surface food grade grating Solar Dryer 2 small tent basic 8’ module gutters & downspouts / become space for formwork , to pour concrete structure A 2 medium tent basic 12’ module gutters and downoouts concrete structure large tent^ basic 16’ module^ gutters and downpouts concrete structure

Page 321

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ^^0 Elio ^= o^^ n%

Page 322

QR CODINGRECEIVE CALLING CUT DOOR/ PLACE AND ATTACH TRANSPARENT FILM o ATTACH AND ADJUST \ BASIC FORM PUT OVEN HOLDERS INSIDE SOLAR COOKER’ G
BUILDING COMPONENTS animal shelter vegetable garden <07 orchard garden Arastewater wetland

Page 323

…> HUMAN POWER ► BICYCLE PEDAL POWER

BICYCLE WITH POWER HUB MULTI-PURPOSE MOVER FLOODZONES WATERSHEDS ELEVATION ELECTRIC SCOOTER POWER PROBLEMS IN HAITI: … _poor roads —narrow lanes _gas/petroleum deficit _underused labor force -Vehicle unfriendly terrain -decentralized distribution ►POTENTIAL IN HAITI: … MINIMUM ENERGY/MINIMUM ENVI­ RONMENTIMPACT -bikes use narrow lanes -bikes trucks can be built from two bikes -Slopes + topography for power regeneration -need for a green transportation system in Hai:i

Page 328

Protocol Terminology A protocol is a set of guidelines, procedures, identifiers, or rules whose definitions aim to clarify and streamline understanding of particular processes according to a set routine. Area Point Network A set of three associated identifiers within a region that connects: 1) renewable or plentiful land resources referred to as AREA resources; with 2) POINT resources, i.e., the human skills, businesses, training programs associated with the best means of using those area resources; and with 3) the associated flows of currency, information energy or materials between these point resources, the latter referred to as network resources. See examples: 22: Area Point Network; 68: The Working Atlas; 92: Nicaragua’s Miskito Indians; 160: Crystal City; 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm BciselineGreen™ - GreenBalance™ The life cycle measurement of greenhouse gases, criteria air pollutants, and toxic releases emanating from any industrial process including the building and manufacturing of buildings and their components that is place specific, based on the combination of the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ national monetary flow “overlayed” with U.S. EPA pollutant data for given bounded geographic region (such as a county or nation). Also referred to as an lO/LCA/GIS system. GreenBalance is the use of BaselineGreen to balance the upstream and downstream life cycles in total activity to render pollutants neutral. See examples: 38: BaselineGreen - GreenBalance; 44: EcoBolance; 124: Montana State University EpiCenter: The Eight Principles; 212: University of Texas at Houston School of Nursing Biom-metrics™ Peer reviewed, repeatable patterns on Earth in the following areas: 1) Eco: ecological repetition of flora and fauna referred to by bio-geographers os biomes 2) Hydro: The categorization of the land into drainage areas called watersheds that are subdivided into sub-hierarches of flow quantities; 3) Climo: the climatic repetition of similar zones worldwide; 4) Geo: the repetition of soil and surface geological typologies worldwide. See examples: 60: ProtoScope, 252: Texas to China With Love; 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Carbon Dioxide Intensity Ratio (CDIR)™ A method of measuring life cycle greenhouse gases (e.g., methane, carbon, nitrous oxide) embodied in a material compared to other negative embodiments that would render a product or building net neutral. NOTE: to accurately accomplish tbs entails a life cycle analysis of the separate product or building constituents See examples: 38: BaselineGreen - GreenBalance; 212: University of Texas at Houston School of Nursing; 226: GreenForms CyberPlan A method to develop the feedback loops between the public and private sectors while using city commissions to monitor results in basic life support areas: air, water, food, energy, and materials As the system learns, the relationships keep changing and the overall city system improves as do the techniques to accomplish stability. See examples; 102: Austin Green Builder Program Development Ladder™ A series of evolving stages that every society or culture seems to evolve through in the development process, including crisis reactive, antagonistic, revolutionary, learning, adaptive. See examples: 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti TERMINOLOGY EcoBolance™ Design Design that quantitatively and spatially accounts for the balance of resource use within and around the immediate building and site. The method works simultaneously with human needs and the extent that ambient processes can fulfill these needs. Balance includes any or all of the air, water, food, energy, and material needs of the ratio of any of these that are possible. See examples; 44; EcoBolance; 218; East Texas Project: 238: University of Texas Solar Decathlon: 226: GreenForms; 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 304: Island Nations Initiative; Haiti EcoBalance™ Planning A planning process inclusive of Life Cycle Design that plans for the use of the resources incorporated in the former to emanate from a defined bounded geographic condition. The method also accounts for the mapping of resources associated with air, water, food, energy and materials while accounting for the two markers of land avoidance; 1) the areas solely reserved for the preservation of high diversity ecosystems; and 2) the areas to be avoided due to hazards. See examples: 44: EcoBolance; 148: Verono Sustainable Development; 218: East Texas Project; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Green Urbanism A method of measuring the green-ness of an urban design. Future efforts will take into account the total impact of entire communities considering their BaselineGreen - GreenBalance as well as prototype building definitions within the prototype section defined below. See examples; 142: Green Urbanism at Mueller: 148: Verano Sustainable Development: 246: Escarpment Village and Block 21 Life Cycle Space The procedure to quantify the first level of resource space required to support a life cycle activity First order is specified in the method so as to differentiate from the other life cycle space requirements. For example, the amount of space needed to harvest water given a certain demand in a given location vs. the amount of space required to mine the ore for making the metal roof or the energy to smelt the steel. See examples; 32: Life Cycle Framework; 130: Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting; 148: Verano Sustainable Development; 304: Island Nations Initiative; Haiti Life Cycle Ratio™ The ratio between the source area and the re-source area ends of the life cycle, can appear as a type of life cycle bar code. The method is useful for summing up all air water, food, energy, or materials for given boundaries on any project. See examples: 32: Life Cycle Framework: 44: EcoBolance; 148: Verano Sustainable Development; 218: East Texas Project; 304: Island Nations Initiative; Haiti ProtoScope™ A method to determine the best actions to take associated with specifying, designing, sharing a Prototype at whatever scale, incorporating procedures embodied witHn protoScope including protoMetrics, protoSpace, and protoPartners, as the parameters for creating an exemplary place-based model for the future. See examples: 60: ProtoScope: 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative; Haiti VisibleGreen™ A method that enables a person to have visible access to the factors that contribute to something being considered green as a means io enhance understanding and create an informed public. See examples: 56: VisibleGreen; 296: EcoSports Complex; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti

Page 329

Prototype Terminology A prototype is on original type, form, or instance of something serving as a typical example, basis, or standard for other tilings of the same category Design for Balance A purposefully designed system (meaning containing a defined performance boundary) that contains one or more resource-balanced features: Air, Water, Food, Energy, Materials The approach often utilizes a life cycle impact analysis to show gross sources or sinks that, when combined, may render the object or design net neutral. The prototype may incorporate the Life Cycle Ratio or GreenBalance to signify degree of balance achieved. See examples: 38: GreenBalance; 44: EcoBalance; 124: Montana Stote University EpiCenter: The Eight Principles Design for the Brain Design that accounts for the phases within the life cycle as behavioral events instead of the usuol phases of Life Cycle Analysis. See examples: 56: VisibleGreen; 102: Austin Green Builder Program: 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 304: Island Nations Initiative; Haiti Design for Disassembly Design that is specifically conceived to be assembled or dismantled utilizing tools or equipment that are readily available by that client type. Note: this may or may not be Design for Open Building and Design for Open Source, but may correlated to both those prototypes. See examples; 226: Greenforms: 238: University of Texas Solar Decathlon: 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design for Flexibility Design whose parts are inter-changeable in a manner that enables change of space size and change of form over time. See examples: 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm; 190: Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home: 226: Greenforms: 238: University of Texas Solar Decathlon; 260: Community Supported Architecture, 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 282: Galveston Redevelopment Design for Interactive Communication A design that communicates its intent and performance in a manner that delights and challenges the brain so that behavior is altered such as incorporation of the OR code in combination with text messaging, or having RFID tags that trigger histograms of use and even crowd source comparisons of community performance. See examples: 56: VisibleGreen; 296: EcoSports Complex; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design for Manufacturing Design that incorporates the technique that it will be manufactured with from the start of the design process while not compromising human use of the structure. See examples; 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm: 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design for Open Building Buildings that specifically separate the structure, infill and utility areas (these buildings do not go as far as specifying either replacements as in Design for Open Source nor emphasizing the disassembly. Design for Disassembly or Design for Manufacturing. See examples: 190: Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home; 260: Community Supported Architecture; 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon; 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 296: EcoSports Complex: 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design for Open Source Design specified in a manner that many materials, assemblages or systems within a building can be interchanged for others of the same Life Cycle Framework or BaselineGreen impact assessment. See examples; 38: BaselineGreen, 60: ProtoScope; 252: Texas to China with Love: 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design For Recycling A design that specifically utilizes a series of safe but discarded materials from the city or region Some of these materials may be improved in the cleaning and manufacturing processes such as the safe recyc’rg of mercury or the management of invasive species See examples; 22: Area Point Network; 32: Life Cycle Framework, 92: Nicaragua’s Miskito Indians, 160: Crystl Gty: 174: Carrizo Springs: 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm: 190: Advanced Green Bu’der Demonstration Home Design for Region Design thot utilizes the natural (renewable and plentiful) and associated human and network resources of a region as the basis for design The approach involves basic technology, indigenous and highly available by-product materials and assemblages See examples; 22: Area Point Network; 60: ProtoScope; 68: The Working Atlas: 82: The Caliche Report. 92: Nicaragua’s Miskito Indians: 130: Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting; 160: Crystal Gty, 168: Hiil Country Youth Ranch; 174: Carrizo Springs; 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm, 190: Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home; 282: Galveston Redevelopment; 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti Design for Space The footprint area necessary for the sustainable use of a resource either from the sourcing or the re­ sourcing end of the life cycle (i.e. the roof area necessary to collect enough water for a given purpose in a given region). See examples: 130: Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting; 148: Verano Sustainable Development Do-it-yourself Design for the Do It Yourself client is similar to Design for Disassembly, Design for Open Building and Design for Open Source but emphasizes issues of weight and size as well as component packaging and shipping. See examples: 238: University of Texas Solar Decathlon; 304: Island Nations Initiative- Haiti Green Machine A green machine combines a living process in ways that augment inherent capabilities while helping both nature and people. See examples: 190: Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home (microbial wetland); 206: Baja School for field Studies (saltwater treating landscape); 268: Texas A&M Solar Decathlon (bat tower); 282: Galveston Redevelopment Life Cycle Design Design taking into account the entire spectrum of life cycle impacts for the specified material, component or assemblage. See examples: 32: bfe Cycle Framework: 38: BaselineGreen, 44: EcoBalance: 102: Austin Green Builder Program. 116: AlA’s Environmental Resource Guide; 134: Greening the Healthcare Sector: 148: Verano Sustainable Development; 212: University of Texas at Houston School of Nursing: 218: East Texas Project, 226: GreenForms; 246: Escarpment Village and Block 21 Prototype Design Incorporating procedures embodied within protoScope induding protoMetrics, protoSpace, and protoPartners os the parameter for creating exemplary place-based models for the future See examples: 60: ProtoScope; 180: Laredo Demonstration Farm: 190: Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home; 226: Greenforms: 260: Community Supported Architecture: 282: Galveston Redevelopment 304: Island Nations Initiative: Haiti

Page 330

Area Point Network Text and Diagrams 23: Fisk III, Pliny. A Conceptual Approach Toward the Development of Appropriate Technologies. American Association for the Advancement of Science Symposium, 1978, Washington, D.C Unpublished conference paper, 1978. Print. 24-27: Fisk III, Pliny. A Contextual Framework for the Development of Appropriate Technologies. The American Association for the Advancement of Science, February 1978, Washington, D.C Unpublished conference paper, 1978 Print. 28: Fisk 111, Pliny. Bioregions and Biotechnologies: A New Planning Tool for Stable Economic Development. New Perspectives on Planning in Ihe West, May 1983, Tempe, AZ Unpublished conference paper, 1983. Print. 29: Fisk 111, Pliny and Gail D.A. Vittori. Towards Sustainable Building Community Economic Impact Using Indigenous Affordable Housing Strategies. Northeast Sustainable Energy Association National Conference, 1985, Foxborough, MA. Unpublished conference paper, 1985. Print. 30-31: Fisk 111, Pliny. Coming to Grips with the Systemics of Sustainability. American Institute of Architects. Committee on the Environment, 1987, Seattle, WA. Unpublished conference paper, 1987. Print. Life Cycle Framework Text and Diagrams 33, 36: Fisk III, Pliny. Towards a Theory and Practice of Sustainable Design. American Institute of Architects, National Conference, June 1992, Boston, MA. Unpublished conference paper, 1992 Print. 34-35: Fisk 111, Pliny, Coming to Grips with the Systemics of Sustainability. American Institute of Architects, Committee on the Environment, 1987, Seattle, WA. Unpublished conference paper. 1987. 37: Fisk III, Pliny, Richard MacMath, and Gail D.A. Vittori. Life Cycle Design Principles for the Architecture and Planning Professions. Proc of The 20th National Passive Solar Conference, American Solar Energy Society, April 1996, Asheville, NC Unpublished conference proceedings, American Solar Energy Society, Colorado, 1996 Print. BciselineGreen - GreenBalance Text and Diagrams 39: Fisk 01. Pliny and Richard MacMath. BoselineGreen and GreenBalance: A Step Beyond Sustainability in Budding Performance. American Solar Energy Society National Conference, June 1998. Albuquerque. NM Unpublished conference paper. 1998. Print. 40: Bavinger. Bill, Pliny Fisk III and Gail DA Vittori. Establishing National Measurable Goals for Total Quality Buildings. American Solar Energy Society National Conference, April 1997, Woshington, D.C. Unpublished conference paper, 1997. Print. 41: Fisk III, Pliny and Richard MacMath. BoselineGreen and GreenBalance: A Step Beyond Sustainobility in Building Performance, American Solar Energy Society National Conference, June 1998, Albuquerque, NM Unpublished conference poper, 1998, Print, 42-43: Fisk III, Pliny and Greg Norris, Baseline Green: A Green Building Design Methodology Unpublished paper, 2000 Print EcoBalance Text and Diagrams 45, 50-52: Fisk III, Pliny and Richard MacMath, EcoBalance: A Sustainable Land Use Planning ond Design Methodology, Unpublished paper, 2009, Print, 46-47: Armistead, David and Pliny Fisk III. Towards Resource Balanced Land Use Planning (The Emergence of Life Cyde Space). Unpublished paper, 1998 Print. 48: Fisk III, Pliny and Richard MacMath. EcoBalance: Sustainable Land Use Planning American Solar Energy Society National Conference, June 2000, Madison, WL Unpublished conference paper, 2000. Print CREDITS 49: Fisk III, Pliny. Principle of Icons as a Life Cycle Language for Planning and Interpretive Purposes. Unpublished conference paper, 2007. Print. 54-55: Fisk 1II, Pliny. The EcoBalance Approach to Transect-Based Planning. Unpublished paper, 2009. Print. Illustrations 51, 54-55: James Wassell VisibleGreen Text and Diagrams 57-59: Fisk III, Pliny. Visible Green. Unpublished paper, 2008. Print ProtoScope Text and Diagrams 61-65: Fisk III, Pliny and John Motloch. Buckminster Fuller Challenge Unpublished paper, 2009. Print. The Working Atlas Text and Diagrams 69-81: Fisk III, Pliny. An Appropriate Technology Working Atlas for the State of Texas. Published in- house, 1977. Print. The Caliche Report Text and Diagrams 83-91: Fisk III, Pliny ond Steven Musick The Caliche Report, Second Edition. Published in-house, 1979. Print. Nicaragua’s Miskito Indians Text and Diagrams 93-101: Fisk III, Pliny and Gail D.A. Vittori. Bio-regional Planning and Appropriate Technology for Nicaragua’s Miskito Indians. Passive Low Energy Architecture, 1984, Mexico City, Mexico. Unpublished conference paper, 1984. Print. Austin Green Building Program Text and Diagrams 103-115: Fisk III, Pliny and Gail D.A. Vittori, Sustainable Rating System: A Conceptual and Contextual Overview for the Gty of Austin. Unpublished report, 1991. Print. Environmental Resource Guide Text and Diagrams , 117-123: Fisk III, Pliny. Establishing an Organizational Rationale for the AlA’s Environmental Resource Guide. American Institute of Architects, Committee on the Environment, 1993, Seattle, WA. Unpublished report, 1993. Print. Montana State University EpiCenter: The Eight Principles Text and Diagrams 125-129: Fisk 111, Pliny. Creating a Decision Support System for Life Cycle Analysis. Unpublished paper, 1995. Print. Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting Text and Diagrams 131-133: Texas Water Development Board and Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting, Second Edition, 1997. Print. Greening the Healthcare Sector Text and Diagrams 135-139: Vittori, Gail DA Green and Healthy Buildings for the Health Core Industry. Setting Health Care’s Environmental Agenda, Health Core Without Harm, Kaiser Permonente, October 2000, Son Francisco, CA. Unpublished conference paper, 2000. Print. Photos 141: © John Durant

Page 331

Green Urbanism at Mueller Text and Diagrams 143-147: Fisk III, Pliny and Gail DA Viftori. Mueller Green Resources Guide Written under contract for Catellus Development Group, 2004. Print. Verano Sustainable Development Text and Diagrams 149-157: Fisk III, Pliny. The EcoBalance Approach to Transect-Based Planning. Unpublished paper, 2.009. Print. Illustrations 151, 153, 155, 157: James Wassell Crystal City Text and Diagrams 160, 163-165, 167: Fisk III, Pliny. Multilevel Coordination of Low Cost Community Produced Passive Solar Systems in Crystal City, Texas. Proceedings of the 4th Annual Passive Solar Conference, October 1979, Kansas City, MO. Unpublished conference paper, 1979. Print. 164-165: Fisk III, Pliny The Max’s Pot Greenhouse Brochure. Published in-house, 1979 Print. Carrizo Springs Text and Diagrams 174, 176-179: Fisk III, Pliny. Availability and Spatial Coincidence of Indigenous Building Materials 2nd Regional Conference on Earthen Building Materials, March 1982, Tucson, AZ Unpublished conference paper, 1982. Print. Laredo Demonstration Farm Text and Diagrams 180, 182-187: Fisk III, Pliny. A Sustainable Farm Demonstration for the State of Texas American Solar Energy Society Annual Conference, 1989, Denver, CO. Unpublished conference paper. 1989. Print. Photos 181, 186, 188-189: © R. Greg Hursley Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home Text and Diagrams 190, 193-196, 199: Fisk III, Pliny. The Texas “Recycled Content” / Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home Project. American Solar Energy Society Annual Conference, 1993, Washington, D C. Unpublished conference paper, 1993. Print. Photos 191, 200-203: © Blake Gordon 204-205: © Paul Bardadgy Baja School For Field Studies Text and Diagrams 208-209: Fisk III, Pliny and Richard MacMath. Baja Master Plan. School for Field Studies, Baja Del Sur, Mexico, 1996. Unpublished report, 1996. Print. UT Houston School of Nursing Text and Diagrams 212, 214-217: Fisk III, Pliny and Richard MacMath. Life Cycle Balancing: Introducing Carbon Dioxide Balancing Within Materials. The University of Texas at Houston Health Sciences Center, 1999. Unpublished report, 1999 Print. Photos 213: © Paul Hester East Texas Project Text and Diagrams 218, 220-223: Fisk IT Piny and Lovleen Gill-Aulakh. EcoBalonce: A Sustanable Land Use Planr.rg and Design Methodology (A primer on the essentials of responsible resource use’ UncubLshed pope* 2009. Print. GreenForms Text and Diagrams 226, 228-229: Fisk LI. Pliny. John Motloch. and Pablo Pacheco Richard MacMath. GreenForms . An Open Building Approach to Affordable/Sustainoble Housing. OB Mexico Conference. Mexico Gty. Mexico. 2002 Unpublished conference poper. 2002 Print. Longju Sustainable Village Text and Diagrams 232, 234-235, 237: Fisk 111, Pliny. Longju Sustainable Village: Designing & Planning A Culturally & Technically Flexible village Environment. American Solar Energy Society National Conference. Reno NV, June 2002 Unpublished conference paper, 2002 Print University of Texas Solar Decathlon Photos 239, 244-245: © Kit Morris Escarpment Village & Block 21 Text 248: Vittori, GaiL Green Development Guiding Principles Unpublished paper, 2002 Print. 250: Siegler, Dylan and Goll Vittori Envisioning a Green Block 21. Unpublished paper. 2006 Print. Photos and Renderings 247: © Philip Hawkins Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center 247, 251: © Andersson-Wise Architects Community Supported Architecture Text and Diagrams 260, 262, 265: Fisk III. Pliny. Community Supported Architecture for Katrina and Rita Flood Vichms. Unpublished paper. 2005. Print. Texas A&M Solar Decathlon Text and Diagrams 268: Fisk III. Pliny. Proposal for Solar Decathlon. Unpublished paper, 2007 Print. Photos 278-281: © Prakesh Patel Galveston Redevelopment Text and Diagrams 282: Fisk III, Pliny. The Buckminster Fuller Challenge Unpublished paper, 2008. Print. Island Nations Initiative Text and Diagrams 304: Fisk III, Pliny. GroForms. A Home Building Kit for Island Notions. Unpublished paper, 2010. Print

Page 332

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1974 “Integrated Systems: University Related.” Energy Primer, Solar, Water, Wind, and Biofuels. Menlo Park, CA; Portola Institute, 1974. 192. Print. 1978 Merrill, Richard, and Thomas E. Gage. “Wind Research Groups.” Energy Primer, Solar, Water, Wind, and Biofuels. New York: Dell Pub., 1978. 151+. Print. 1979 Loescher, Samuel M. “An Obstructed View.” The Texas Observer 19 Jan. 1979: 18. Print. Reece, Ray. The Sun Betrayed: a Report on the Corporate Seizure of U.S. Solar Energy Development. Boston, Ma.: South End, 1979. 9-11. Print. Smith, Michael B. “Homemade Solar Heater Constructed with Junk.” Austin American Statesman 1979. Print. Yemma, John. “The Town That Turned Off the Gas.” The Christian Science Monitor 1979. Print. 1980 “Alternative Energy Conference Told of Windmills and Ice Cubes.” The New York Times 21 Oct. 1980. Print. Melcher, Joan. “Power Bills and Politics in South Texas.” A. T. Times: Journal of Appropriate Technology 1.3 (1980): 7-9. Print. Talbot, David. “Renewable Energy Builds Self-Relliance.” In These Times July- Aug. 1980. Print. 1981 Greensfelder, Claire. “New Technology Gets Political.” In These Times Dec.-Jan. 1981. Print. Lire-Powell, Julie. “Pliny Fisk: Solar Savior.” New Age Oct. 1981: 28. Print. Lockwood, Charles. “Toward a New Self-Sufficiency.” Texas Flyer Nov. 1981: 66. Print. 1987 “Couple Uses Materials from Area to Build Home.” Austin American Statesman 23 Apr. 1987 Print. Peterson, John. “Miskito Coast.” Third Coast July 1987 Print. 1990 Baldwin, J. “The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (Max’s Pot).” Whole Earth Ecolog: the Best of Environmental Tools and Ideas. New York: Harmony, 1990. Print.

Page 333

1991 1994 Brown, Patricia Leigh. “Houses the Cows Would Love to Eat.” The New York Times 12 Dec. 1991: C6. Print. “The Greening of Architecture.” Architecture: The AIA Journal May 1991: 61. Print. Thomspon, William. “A Natural Legacy: Ian McHarg and His Followers.” Planning Nov. 1991: 14. Print. Tilley, Roy Don. “Blueprint for Survival.” Architecture: The AIA Journal May 1991: 64-71. Print. Tilley, Roy Don. “On the Boards: Carroll College Student Center.” Architecture: The AIA Journal May 1991: 45. Print. 1992 Ayala, Elaine. “Building for the Future.” Austin American Statesman 27 Oct. 1992. Print. Burns, Bob. “UN Honors Environmental Program.” Austin American Statesman 29 Apr. 1992. Print. F B. “Sustainable Design Hot Topic for Architects.” Christian Science Monitor 30 June 1992: 11. Print. Hess, Alan. “Technology Exposed.” Landscape Architecture May 1992: 38. Print. M. S. H. “Austin Pilot Project Wins Green Award.” Architecture: The AIA Journal July 1992: 85. Print. M.J.C. “Rethinking the ’60s at the New School.” Architecture: The AIA Journal May.1992: 24. Print. 1993 Branch, Mark Alden. “The State of Sustainability.” Progressive Architecture Mar. 1993: 72. Print. Dorris, Virginia Kent. “Land Stewardship.” Architecture: The AIA Journal June 1993:99-103. Print. Gibson, Scott. “A House of Timber, Straw, and Clay.” Fine Homebuilding Aug.- Sept. 1993: 88. Print. Haggard, Kenneth, and Greg McMillian. “Straw Bale Passive Solar Construction.” Solar Today May-June 1993: 17 Print. McLeister, Dan. “Sustainable Design Will Be Key Issue of the 1990s, AIA President Says.” Professional Builder May 1993: 134. Print 1994 Bryce, Robert. “The Mad, Mad World of Pliny Fisk, From Fringe to Center. The Austin Chronicle 29 Apr. 1994: 50-51. Print. Sih, Jeanine. “Austins Green Builder Program.” The Austin Chronicle 29 Apr. 1994: 50-51. Print. Steen, Athena Swentzell. The Straw Bale House. White River Junction. VT: Chelsea Green Pub., 1994. Print Thayer, Robert L. “Rethinking the Ecology of Materials.” Gray World. Green Heart: Technology, Nature, and Sustainable Landscape. New York: Wiley. 1994. 282-87 Print. 1995 Anderson, Abba. “Advances in Texas: Sustainability Gets ‘Green Lite’” Earthword Journal 5 (1995): 50. Print. Bryce, Robert. “Arch-Subversive.” The Austin Chronicle July 1995: 24. Print. Haggard, Kenneth, and Greg McMillan. “First California Approved Straw- Bale Construction.” Earthword Journal 5 (1995): 38-40. Print. Lopez, Barnett Dianna., and William D. Browning. A Primer on Sustainable Building. Snowmass, CO: Institute, 1995. Print. Tzonis, Alexander, Liane Lefaivre, and Richard Diamond. “Lerado Demonstration Blueprint Farm.” Architecture in North America since 1960 Boston: Bulfinch, 1995. 240-41. Print. 1996 Brown, Patricia Leigh. “Mr. Fisk Builds His Green House.” The New York Times 15 Feb. 1996: Cl. Print. Moed, Andrea. “The Infinite Grid.” Metropolis Dec. 1996: 44. Print. “Pliny Fisk 1II: The Rebar Revolution.” Designer/Builder Sept. 1996- 26. Print Van, Der Ryn, Sim., and Stuart Cowan. Ecological Design. Washington, DC: Island, 1996.31+ Print. 1997 Bone, Eugenia. “Floating Options.” NY Black Book Spring 1997: 167 Print.. Haslam, Michael. “Desert Bloom.” The Architectural Review 1 July 1997: 54- 56. Print. Planet Neighborhood. PBS. 1997 Television. 1998 Jodidio, Philip. “Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems.” Contemporary American Architects. Koln: Taschen, 1998. 44-53. Print. Lerner, Scott. “Buildings Made From Waste Materials.” The Futurist May 1998 37 Print. Lerner, Steve. “Pliny Fisk III: The Search for Low-Impact Building Materials and Techniques.” Eco-pioneers: Practical Visionaries Solving Today’s Environmental Problems. Cambridge: MIT, 1998. 19-36. Print. “Pliny Fisk: On the Cutting Edge.” Envronmental Design and Construction May- June 1998:60. Print.

Page 334

1998 2002 “Pliny The Greener.” Architecture: The AIA Journal June 1998: 55-59 Print. “The Promise of Technology.” Perspecta: The Yale Architectural Journal 29 (1998): 50. Print. 1999 Snider, Bruce D. “Shades of Green.” Custom Home Sept.-Oct. 1999: 64. Print. 2000 Elizabeth, Lynne, and Cassandra Adams. Alternative Construction: Contemporary Natural Building AAethods. New York: Wiley, 2000. Print. Lawrence, Robyn Griggs. “The Godparents of Green.” Natural Home May- June 2000: 44. Print. Martin, Sam. “Green Building: The Right Stuff.” Mother Earth News July 2000: 45. Print., Shortridge, Jennie. “A Hobbit House.” Natural Home Mar.-Apr. 2000: 29. Print. Steiner, Frederick R. The Living Landscape: an Ecological Approach to Landscape Planning. New York: McGraw Hill, 2000 Print. Thompson, J. William., and Kim Sorvig. Sustainable Landscape Construction: a / Guide to Green Building Outdoors. Washington, D.C.: Island, 2000. Print. Wines, James. “Green Design Research and Technological Innovations.” Green Architecture: The Art of Architecture in the Age of Ecology. New York City: Taschen, 2000. 151-55. Print, 2001 Cortez, Dyanne Fry. “Greening of America: One Brick at a Time.” The Good Life Jan. 2001: 17 Print Moore, Steven. Technology and Place: Blueprint Farm as an Ironic Demonstration of Sustainable Architecture. University of Texas, 2001. Print. Motloch, John L. Introduction to Landscape Design. New York: Wiley, 2001. 110+ Print. Swanson, Kyle. “Building Maximum Potential.” New Texas Nov. 2001: 16. Print. Thompson, J. William. “A View from the Future.” Landscape Architecture July 2001: 126. Print. “What Makes a House a Home?” New Age Sept.-Oct. 2001: 65. Print. 2002 Jafari, Samira. “In UT’s Solar House, You Can Rearrange More than Furniture.” Austin American Statesman 13 June 2002. Print. Kattlewell, Caroline. “It Takes a Solar Village.” The Washington Post 27 Sept. 2002: 34. Print. Lindell, Chuck. “No Place Like Solar Home.” Austin American Statesman 25 Sept. 2002. Print. Sebesta, Courtney. “Pentagon Redesign Earns Award.” Austin American Statesman 26 Nov. 2002. Print. 2003 Beard, Tyler. “Daredevil Design.” Lonestar Living. Bulfinch, 2003. 126-27 Print. Clark-Madison, Mike, Michael King, and Amy Smith. “Toxic Agenda Taints Barton Report.” The Austin Chronicle July 2003: 1-11. Print. Curran, Rob, “Green Building Takes Root in Commercial Sector.” Austin Business Journal 13 (2003): 20+. Print. Martin, Ken. “How Green’s Your Building?” The Good Life Oct. 2003: 28. Print. Sandrick, Karen. “Building A Green Future With Environmental! Friendly Construction Materials.” Health Facilities Management Feb. 2003: 15. Print. “Solar Nights, Natural Tendancies,” Urban Space July-Aug. 2003: 19. Print. 2004 Brewer, Walter. “Co-Director Helps Build Organization That Impacts Communities Worldwide.” Austin American Statesman 28 Nov. 2004: Gl. Print. Snell, Clarke. The Good House Book: a Common-sense Guide to Alternative Homebuilding. New York: Lark, 2004. Print. Wallner, Stefan. Stigfinnare: Innovativt Byggande For En Hdllbar Utveckling. Goteborg: Byggd Miljb & Hallbar Utveckling. Arkitektursektionen. Chalmers Tekniska Hbgskola, 2004. Print. 2005 Gould, Kira L. “Special Hurricane Report: Designers Propose Low-income Housing Solutions for the Gulf Coast.” Architectural Record Jan. 2005: 32. Print. “Green Design Trailblazers.” Natural Home July-Aug. 2005: 29 Print. Rumsey, Peter, and Jason McLennan. “Green Edge: Heroes Before LEED, Green Patron Saints.” Environmental Design and Construction July 2005: 76. Print. Smith, Amy. “Back to the Trenches.” The Austin Chronicle June 2005: 32-38. Print. St. Clair, Ashly. “Far Southeast EMS Station #28.” Texas Architect Nov.-Dec. 2005: 47 Print. 2006 Crosbie, Michael J. “Center for Maximum Potential Buidling Systems: Campus and Studio.” Architecture for Architects. Mulgrave, Vie., Australia: Images Pub. Group, 2006. 46-47 Print.

Page 335

2006 2009 Haggard, Kenneth, Polly Cooper, and Christine Gyovai. Fractal Architecture: Design for Sustainability. Santa Margarita, CA: San Luis Sustainability Group 2006. 132. Print. Martin, Sam. “Eco-noclast.” Dwell Dec.-Jan. 2006: 126. Print Martin, Sam. “Visionaries.” Metropolis Jan. 2006: 61. Print. Messer, Kate X. “Best of Austin: Best Way to Get Drunk with a Genius.” The Austin Chronicle Oct. 2006: 38. Print. “Pliny Fisk ‘63: Eco-Pioneer.” Trinity Pawling Winter 2006: 10. Print 2007 Francese, Dora. Architettura E Vivibilitau: Modelli Di Verifica, Principi Di Biocompatibilitau, Esempi Di Opere per II Rispetto Ambientale. Milano: F. Angeli, 2007 76+. Print. “GroHome.” Texas Architect July-Aug. 2007: 19. Print. “Here on Earth.” Radio Without Borders. Wisonsin Public Radio. 2007 Radio. Hylton, Hilary. “Building A Greener World: Director: Gail Vittori.” Time Magainze 27 Apr. 2007: 63. Print. Kellert, Steven, Judith H. Heerwagen, and Martin L. Mador. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. New York City: John Wiley & Sons, 2007 309-10. Print. Levy, Rachel. “Easy Being Green.” Austin Fit Mar. 2007: 36-39 Print. Ryker, Lori. “Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems.” Off the Grid Homes: Case Studies for Sustainable Living. Salt Lake City, UT: Gibbs Smith, 2007 25+ Print. 2008 Adams, Kyle, and Note Blakeslee. “35 People Who Will Shape Our Future.” Texas Monthly Feb. 2008: 101. Print. Big Ideas for a Small Planet. Sundance Channel. 2008. Television. Cox, Christine. “Blueprint for Sustainability.” Texas Construction Nov. 2008: 29. Print. Guenther, Robin, and Gail Vittori. Sustainable Healthcare Architecture. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Print. Lebkowsky, Jon. “The Serious Play in Saving the World.” The Austin Chronicle 18 Apr. 2008:64. Print. Lockwood, Charles. “Hospital, Heal Thyself.” United Hemispheres Mar. 2008: 42. Print. Lockwood, Charles. “Q&A with Pliny Fisk.” Urban Land 674 (2008): 121. Print. “Max’s Pot of Green.” SEGD Design 2008: 38. Print. Sharpe, Stephen. “Sustainable Healthcare Design.” Texas Architect May-June 2008: 32. Print. Amoss, Marianne K. “The Pioneer.” Urbanite Oct 2009: 42 Print. Cox, Christine. “The Greening of America Started in Austin” Austin Woman Mar. 2009:76-78. Print. “Eco-Pioneers.” Going Green. CNN International. 2009. Television. Fisk III, Pliny. “Mad Scientists, Rabble Rousers and Other Thoughtful People’ Arc CA: The Journal of the AIA California Council 2009 2. Print Freed, Eric Corey. “5 Questions about Our Future.” Natural Home May-June 2009:68. Print. Jakublak, David. “Eco Movement Eyes ‘Regenerative’ Hospitals” Pharmacy Practice News Sept. 2009 Print. McCampbell, Candy. “Healthy Hospitals.” Texas Construction Nov. 2009 23. Print. Pavlou. Stephanie Z. “The Sustainable Side of O&P.” O&P Business News Jan. 2009: 19 Print. “Platinum Rated Medical Center ‘LEEDs’ the Way to Sustainability.” Health Facilities Management Mar. 2009 3. Print. 2010 “The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems.” Tribeza July 2010: 70- 75. Print. Hosey, Lance. “The G-List: ls the Rift between Design Excellence and Environmental Performance Getting Wider?” Architect Magazine. Hanley Wood, 27 July 2010 Web.